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

Reply via email to