[cad-linux-dev] Re: BRL-CAD is released as Open Source
- From: "cr88192" <cr88192@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <cad-linux-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 09:47:54 +1000
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Sean Morrison" <morrison@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <cad-linux-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 5:41 AM
Subject: [cad-linux-dev] Re: BRL-CAD is released as Open Source
>
> On Sat, 15 Jan 2005, cr88192 wrote:
>
>> very cool.
>>
>> misc: anyone have luck with or know where I can find working windows
>> binaries?...
>
> There is a group working on implementing a substantial portion of an
> MSVC-based build for BRL-CAD right now. It is one of many tasks this
> group is working on and I wouldn't expect any anytime "relatively soon"
> (i.e. within a couple weeks). That said, I have played with beta builds
> on Windows that have been available for a couple years since before going
> open source. That version, though, was riddled with a variety of bugs
> that have long since been fixed -- making it releaseable. The "proper"
> build will get made one way or the other, and when it does an announcement
> will be made regarding the availability of it.
>
yeah, I await windows binaries.
for now I am thinking I will just have to set up linux.
I have an 8GB hd, which should allow at least a fairly complete install
(base, dev tools, X, ...).
>> I got it to build eventually, but then I get a "this isn't a Tk
>> application"
>> type message, which I don't understand and don't know how to work
>> around...
>> this is along with another ominous message 'unknown color
>> name"SystemButtonFace"'.
>
> If you got that far into the build, I'd be interested in seeing your
> patches that got you there (perhaps you'd be willing to post them to the
> BRL-CAD patches tracker on sf.net?). I did much of the initial work that
> gets at least msys through most of the libraries and have a fairly good
> idea of how much work remains (not much).
>
well, mostly it was lots of trivial crap, like fixing things in headers and
such (in a few places it was problems within cygwin's own headers...).
along with having to comment out a lot of occurances for prototypes which
were already in the headers and were causing errors (eg: random).
occasional was just disabling some things.
similar was tweaking out makefiles a little, eg, like the makefiles
continuously using the wrong libs for GL.
most I doubt would be acceptable for an actual build, as they are likely to
hurt builds on other systems.
..
> My first guess on the Tk errors without seeing the actual commands you've
> been running and changes you've made would be that Tcl/Tk and company are
> not getting build with the proper win* defines that their build system
> would have used. Either that, or there's a configure.ac fix needed to
> ensure that Tk is getting linked like it should.
>
well, it is actually building the "unix" variant, which is being run on an x
server emulator. I am not sure, it may depend on the unix variety being
built (eg: mining it for window handles or whatever).
there is still the problem that it is broke.
in a lot of other places though (eg: mged and similar), there is only really
code for x it seems, so this may be a hassle (eg: if I wanted to make it not
use x). it seems to want to do a lot of manual drawing and such as well.
I have noted, however, that the x server emulator that comes with cygwin is
more convinient than xfree86, eg, in that it integrates with windows and
goes fast vs being on its own and being slow, however, I am thinking this
could be part of the problem (it is possible that the current x server is an
imperfect clone of xfree86, and this may be relevant?).
other x apps (which came with cygwin), however, seem to be functional.
> Glad to hear about your progress regardless..
>
yes.
inter-os tasks are possible albeit annoying. the main thing I guess is
having an available hd large enough to put it on (otherwise I would have to
free up one of my main ones, which would both be annoying and put me further
from the 500GB mark).
yes, now one could get 2 250GB drives and reach the mark, I have a number of
smaller drives, but am within 10's of GB of the mark (ok, about 60...).
ok, so it is just kind of a race between me and my brother, to see who hits
the mark first...
lame sort of...
Other related posts:
