Hello,
I was under the impression that GLUT dependencies had been removed.
It's not that I want to blame anyone, I'm just a bit surprised to
realize that there actually _are_ dependencies - like this one:
quickstep: 8:26:43 /usr/local/src/FlightGear make
Making all in tests
gcc -march=pentiumpro
I was under the impression that GLUT dependencies had been removed.
It's not that I want to blame anyone, I'm just a bit surprised to
realize that there actually _are_ dependencies - like this one:
Glutless builds only work on fgfs itself; the tests and paraphernalia
haven't been ported.
If
Hi there,
I'm completely newbie at this simulator (well, I played MSFS for a
while, years and years ago...).
I had some trouble compiling the sources of FlightGear, and I've worked
around in a totally brutal manner... I've commented those line in the
code that referrers to glutIinit() function
Sorry, I've forgotten something...
darko wrote:
By the way, if I have to compile again FlightGear, exactly, which
version I have to download to compile FG?
I meant: which version of glut?
It would be possible changing the button for the throttle? PagUP
doesn't work as well.
I also cannot use
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Monday 18 August 2003 09:41, Matevz Jekovec wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello All,
while this isn't directly linked to the Glut/SDL issue, it occurred to me
that
if we ever consider moving to a different or
On Tuesday 19 August 2003 10:35, Matevz Jekovec wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
On Monday 18 August 2003 09:41, Matevz Jekovec wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello All,
while this isn't directly linked to the Glut/SDL issue, it occurred to me
that
if we ever
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello All,
while this isn't directly linked to the Glut/SDL issue, it occurred to me that
if we ever consider moving to a different or improved model object format
then using one that supports boolean operations or trim curves would be
really handy. How feasible would this
On Monday 18 August 2003 09:41, Matevz Jekovec wrote:
Lee Elliott wrote:
Hello All,
while this isn't directly linked to the Glut/SDL issue, it occurred to me
that
if we ever consider moving to a different or improved model object format
then using one that supports boolean operations
Hello All,
while this isn't directly linked to the Glut/SDL issue, it occurred to me that
if we ever consider moving to a different or improved model object format
then using one that supports boolean operations or trim curves would be
really handy. How feasible would this be?
LeeE
Norman,
(Sorry this message got so long)
Let me try to get this discussion back on track and address some of
your specific comments. The way my mind works [1] I like to think
before I leap. That involves thinking through the process (or design)
as far as possible before taking any irreversable
Erik Hofman writes:
Oh, I almost forgot. It's actively developed.
Nobody seems interested in anything but ssg in the plib list (and still).
Hmm...
SG probably doesn't need any work
PUI has had considerable attention in the past year
Although there are several projects underway, I am
not
James Turner writes:
Obviously the code is pretty close to building under mingw,
pretty close ???
AFAIK Fred's recent MSVC compiled FGFS is the first non-MingW
compiled Win32 executable ever releaased :-)
Cheers
Norman
___
Flightgear-devel
Curtis L. Olson writes:
Norman Vine writes:
Getting rid of GLUT dependencies is a good thing
even if the message in the CVS Log is a more then
a *little* scary since it 'mentions' moving to SDL
We should probably have an open discussion on the developers list
about this at some
Norman Vine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps if a few of the 'Nix' FlightGear users were to try
building PLIB with freeglut and sharing their results with
the freeglut developers this release would happen sooner :-)
I built FreeGLUT pre-release-candidate (or something similar) a few weeks
Norman Vine wrote:
Erik Hofman writes:
Oh, I almost forgot. It's actively developed.
Nobody seems interested in anything but ssg in the plib list (and still).
Hmm...
SG probably doesn't need any work
Could well be.
PUI has had considerable attention in the past year
Although there are several
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Anyone else have any positives or negatives? Any red flags, or
additional issues we should consider?
I really would like to have SDL support available in FlightGear. In can
give FG a good step in the right direction. If Cygwin isn't supported
that would be a major
Christopher S Horler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Does sdl improve flightgear at all? -If it is put in do we see some
real advances? Might time be better spent cleaning up the code?
Oh, removing unneeded (GLUT-)dependecies _is_ sort of a clean-up. On the
other hand I agree to the opinion that
Norman Vine writes:
Getting rid of GLUT dependencies is a good thing
even if the message in the CVS Log is a more then
a *little* scary since it 'mentions' moving to SDL
We should probably have an open discussion on the developers list
about this at some point. I'm not ready to make the
Erik Hofman writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
PUI has had considerable attention in the past year
Although there are several projects underway, I am
not really sure that SDL has anything comparable yet.
PUI is ssg based.
No although there has been some discussion to that end
as a GUI
Norman Vine wrote:
Erik Hofman writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
PUI has had considerable attention in the past year
Although there are several projects underway, I am
not really sure that SDL has anything comparable yet.
PUI is ssg based.
No although there has been some discussion to that end
as a
As a Linux user I don't care either why, I can only show my sympathy to
the entire windows user community.
I have one/two question though do all the dependencies build correctly
on cygwin - how many problems will actually need to be fixed. It is
important to access the exact size of the problem
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Glut
Perhaps, Jim. However, I believe that my problem has to do with the
number of concurrently playing sounds and plib being able to open up a
channel to output sound on. I think this because if I stop all other
applications
Chris Reichow [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Note Cygwin definitely made the list. It is officially supported, however,
we're still talking about a major architecture change here, but in my own
humble opinion I think it would be for the better. SDL is actually actively
developed, and I have a
On Wednesday, August 13, 2003, at 09:56 am, Erik Hofman wrote:
Oh, I almost forgot. It's actively developed.
Nobody seems interested in anything but ssg in the plib list (and
still).
For me this is the absolute crux of the argument; SDL has been and is
used to develop commercial quality game
Curtis L. Olson writes:
Norman Vine writes:
Haven't seen many reports from FlightGear developers
doing any beta testing guess they are all to busy beta
testing OSG and SDL integration
If this was marriage counseling, the above statement would be call
not fighting fair. :-)
I
Erik Hofman writes:
I really would like to have SDL support available in FlightGear. In can
give FG a good step in the right direction. If Cygwin isn't supported
that would be a major drawback though.
Positives:
Coments interspersed
* Native Win32 threading support
This works
Perhaps, Jim. However, I believe that my problem has to do with the number of concurrently playing sounds and plib being able to open up a "channel" to output sound on. I think this because if I stop all other applications before starting FG, it will work just fine. Otherwise, (if I have Winamp
Norman Vine wrote:
Erik Hofman writes:
* Native Win32 threading support
This works wonderfully with our current code
http://sources.redhat.com/pthreads-win32/
* Native IRIX sproc threading support
Isn''t there a good pthread support on IRIX
Yes, there is. But pthreads isn't everything.
Native
Getting rid of GLUT dependencies is a good thing
even if the message in the CVS Log is a more then
a *little* scary since it 'mentions' moving to SDL
attached patch gets rid of all mention of GLUT from
the cockpit directory
Norman
cockpit.diffs.tgz
Description: Binary data
When compiling FlightGear for Win32 using Cygwin, how do you link GLUT into
the compile -- with the Linux libraries, or the Windows ones? You can
download the GLUT .lib and .dll binaries, but obviously GCC can't use those
to link with. How can I get the GLUT libraries in a form usable by GCC to
Nick Foster writes:
When compiling FlightGear for Win32 using Cygwin, how do you link GLUT into
the compile -- with the Linux libraries, or the Windows ones? You can
download the GLUT .lib and .dll binaries, but obviously GCC can't use those
to link with. How can I get the GLUT libraries in a
]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Curtis L.
Olson
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 4:19 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] GLUT under Cygwin
Nick Foster writes:
When compiling FlightGear for Win32 using Cygwin, how do you
link GLUT into
the compile
I found the GLUT libs, but still can't resolve deps. I'll look to see where
it's looking.
Thanks,
--nick
Nick Foster writes:
When compiling FlightGear for Win32 using Cygwin, how do you
link GLUT into
the compile -- with the Linux libraries, or the Windows ones? You can
download the GLUT
Nick Foster writes:
I found the GLUT libs, but still can't resolve deps. I'll look to see where
it's looking.
If you post the first couple of error messages we can probably
pinpoint what is wrong
Norman
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL
Nick Foster writes:
i did a full install of Cygwin, all the packages, and although it installs
GLUI, i don't see any libs for GLUT.
PLIB and SimGear build fine, but FlightGear dies when compiling the test
suite, with undefined references to _glutInit.
It's a little hidden :-)
$ find /lib
i got it -- it builds! hooray.
thanks for your help.
--nick
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Norman Vine
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2002 5:33 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] GLUT under Cygwin
Nick
Andy Ross writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
I think that you will find that inorder to get 'high quality' fonts
one needs to use a vector based font directly. The only problem in
doing this is that the polygon count goes up considerably.
Have you tried the antialiased fonts in KDE, WinXP or recent
Andy Ross writes:Glut font format
Norman Vine wrote:
Here's Mark's example of the command used to generate the
sorority.txf
file: Just change the Font name and the 'glist' to be what you want
gentexfont \
-fn '-sgi-sorority-medium-r-normal--40-*-*-*-p-*--ascii' \
Right, but this
Have you tried using the Font generator
http://www.opengl.org/developers/code/mjktips/TexFont/gentexfont.c
I have used this successfully with Cygwin and is in how ALL of the
PLib fonts were created.
I assume that this was Cygwin witn XFree86?
Thanks,
Paul
Norman Vine wrote:
I think that you will find that inorder to get 'high quality' fonts
one needs to use a vector based font directly. The only problem in
doing this is that the polygon count goes up considerably.
Have you tried the antialiased fonts in KDE, WinXP or recent versions
of Gtk+?
Andy Ross writes:
Norman Vine wrote:
Check Marks's document about Textured Fonts for further information.
Of particular interest is Mark's gentexfont program that can create
a TXF format font from an X-windows font.
This is how far I got. Unfortunately, Mark's documentation is all
about how
Norman Vine wrote:
Here's Mark's example of the command used to generate the sorority.txf
file: Just change the Font name and the 'glist' to be what you want
gentexfont \
-fn '-sgi-sorority-medium-r-normal--40-*-*-*-p-*--ascii' \
Right, but this only gets you a copy of the X11 bitmap
42 matches
Mail list logo
