On 7/1/07, Tatsuhiro Nishioka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Hans, > > On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:05 AM, Hans Fugal wrote: > > > On 6/28/07, Tatsuhiro Nishioka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Now I'm working on building both 0.9.11-pre1 and cvs head. > >> I had some errors in linking osgViewer (when building fgfs cvs-head/ > >> OSG-svn head) > >> OSG-2.0 seems OK so I'll go with it for cvs-head for a while. > >> By the way, do you know which revision/tag is suitable for building > >> 0.9.11-pre1? > > > > I was able to build and run the 0.9.11-pre1 tarball without any > > changes at all (using the 0.9.11-pre1 SimGear and macports plib). I > > don't recall for sure, but I probably already had the alut.h fix in > > place. > > I checked out the source files including 0.9.11-pre1, SimGear-0.3.11- > pre1, and Plib-1.8.4. SimGear-0.3.11 doesn't include the alut.h fix, > so it works with self-compiled freeglut as you wrote before, but I > don't think many users will do that so I decide to provide patches > for Mac OS X users separately. > This way, the changes I made don't affect neither the original source > files or Apple's ALUT framework.
Ok, it's as I suspected then. I'm not sure what alut.h fix you're referring to - the only one I know of is to put it in place, or not use it in the first place. If there is a SimGear workaround that would be nice, because it wouldn't require fiddling around with Apple's framework, which is bound to cause headaches (i.e. on security upgrades it will no longer exist). > Though I'm very glad about your contribution to Mac OS X port, I need > to tell you some potential problems in posting patches. Mac OS X port > is a bit complicated since it must support both PPC/Intel Macs, so Linux must support dozens of architectures. > the Mac port has patches for both PPC/Intel Macs. This means that the > patches you will create might affect the existing patches that are > provided separately. so If you post the patches to the original > source files, I'd like you to consult the patches for Mac OS X port > to avoid conflicts. The patches for Mac OS X are available at: I appreciate your work on the XCode port, and I'm sure the downloadable .app will be more user-friendly and mac-like. I, on the other hand, am a UNIX geek at heart and so I am most interested in helping to get FlightGear to compile out of the box (and helping to keep it that way), without requiring a separate fork. I think mostly thanks to your past work, we're as close as I've ever seen - only one small patch and the ALUT problem for PLIB. I'm happy to coordinate testing with anyone who has ppc; I have an intel mac. I did have ppc for about a year so I'm familiar with both sides of the fence, as far as that goes. > Patches for 0.9.11-pre1 (in progress) > http://macflightgear.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/macflightgear/ > branches/0.9.11-pre1/patches/ > > Patches for fgfs-cvs/OSG > http://macflightgear.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/macflightgear/trunk/ > patches/ > > # patches for automake / configure will never have conflicts with the > existing patches since Mac OS X port doesn't use these at this moment. > Unfortunately at the moment I've dedicated all the hard disk space I can to FlightGear, but I'll take a look through viewcvs. > I'm currently working on changing the patches for 0.9.11-pre1 so some > cannot be applied as it is, > but will be fixed soon. > > Anyway, I'm very happy to have developers for Mac OS X. > Hope it helps you. Thanks! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now. http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
