On Mon, 02 Aug 2004 08:18:00 +0200, Boris wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen wrote: > > On Sun, 01 Aug 2004 20:31:49 +0200, Boris wrote in message > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > >>one other thing: I mentioned already that I didn't have the original > >>pre-release available to create that patch, meanwhile > >>Stewart & Steven have released a patch that's based on the > >_original_>pre2-release, which *differs* from mine, you can get that > >file > >at:>http://www.geocities.com/sandreas41/data/base-0.9.5p2-0.9.5.tar. > >gz > > > > > > ..ah, that means at least one of you guys has been a naughty boy > > and worked from something _other_ than an official FG release. ;-) > > > Arnt, how about starting to actually *read* my postings - at least > those that you reply to ? :-) ..heh, good catch, could looong length be an issue? ;-) > I did mention _all the time_ that I didn't have the original > (pre)releases available and hence decided to use a CVS checkout > as reference basis for the patch. > > Having meanwhile had the chance to test it, it does seem > work anyway, just more files being put into the folder - but > I didn't really check it thorougly. > > Contary to that, the 0.9.4 final => 0.9.5 final patch is based > on official releases, which I also mentioned ;-) > > >>As I said already: I would not mind creating such a patch chain, > >>but first we would need to know whether things are working as > >>expected and THEN I would still need access to the original > >>pre-releases in order to create the necessary patch archives. > > > > > > ..another idea to test these; provide test scripts. I have > > bandwith and disk space and vacant cpus, but no time. > > that would then be very specific to FlightGear, ..yup, thats precisely the idea. > and I think Steven & Stewart are right in trying to keep things as > general as possible, e.g. that way they can use that script > for _many_ purposes, so it does have its justification outside > the FG world. ..it (tardiff) does, and it looks good, so build on it. > IF such an extension is considered a good idea by several > users here, one could think about providing externals > means for it. ..in this meritocraty, _only_ those ideas that are _acted_ upon, prevails. ;-) > > ..basically, something like "for FG in FlightGear SimGear plib ; > > ;for V in 0.9.5 0.9.4 # etc for SimGear plib too > > ;do wget -c $FG.org/downloads/FG-$V.tar.bz2 > > ;tar jxvf $FG$V.tar.bz2 > > ;done > > # etc > > ;done > > > so you are talking of an automated updater ? ..define "automated". The idea is the user should find an update script over at fg.org, and be able to update to the latest official release, and at least "say Yes". ;-) > regarding that one really has to be careful, not > everybody has a full GNU toolchain available, > even though there are things like Cygwin they > do significantly complicate things for novice > users - or at least for those who are not really > familiar with Unix. > > (I know that stuff like wget is also available as > a standard Win32 compiled version, but it's not > per default available on windows ...) ..so test for it and haul it home where needed. ;-) > > > diff -ruN $FG$V $FG$($V-1) >diff-from-$FG$($V-1)-to-$FG$V > > md5sum diff-from-$FG$($V-1)-to-$FG$V > > bzip2 diff-from-$FG$($V-1)-to-$FG$V > > md5sum diff-from-$FG$($V-1)-to-$FG$V.bz2 > > # etc". > > ..the md5sums are neat to verify that we wind up with the same > > source tarballs, without having to build them. > > not sure about how much sense something like that would > make, we will have to wait for other opinions, ..what suddenly stopped you from forming and voicing your own opinions here? ;-) > but it's gonna certainly be beyond the scope of "tardiff". ..it _is_. ;-) > > ..expanding on this idea, it is possible to have newbies use "this > > upgrade script" to update their old FG to the current, > > I really doubt, how feasible something like that would be for > for "newbies", I know a lot of windows users who would certainly > not manage to make use of something like that - and as soon as > you are a user of a unix-based OS the debate becomes pointless > as you are likely to be somewhat more familiar with your system > anyway and certainly would not care doing the required steps > manually. > > > > first chking > > for their old FG, then fetch Boris' tardiffs > > tardiff itself comes from Steven & Stewart Andreason - so > it certainly was _not_ mine idea - just to clarify things > and give credit where it's due. ..true. And when you use their tardiff script to diff tarballs, those tardiffs or better, diffballs are "yours." > > and patch up their FG > > install to the latest official FG, SimGear and plib. > > I think we'll really have to wait for other opinions, I really > doubt that it would pay off - simply because the work that needs > to be done would probably take relatively long compared to that > group of users who might really make use of something like that, > but that's my personal view ... ..see above. ;-) > > ..at some stage, the official tarballs (or a cvs co to the latest > > cvs release tag) becomes more comvenient, so don't over-engineer it. > > ;-) > > I agree, I've talked to Steven & Stewart about that and they also > think that the current version is going to be the final version for > the near future, maybe there'll be one or two small fixes but not > many enhancements anymore. It might still become useful to add one > or two small features when changes in the fgfs base archive require > more sophisticated tracking mechanisms. > > The only thing that I can currently think of would be an addition > to support simultaneous creation of ZIP archives, simply as there > are a lot more common for winows and more familiar to its users > so it might really make things simpler for those users... ..I'd rather see them suggest useing tgz, if the idea is get Winzip working. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
