ok cool but puredata.info seems to be down now... I'll try agan later thanks
a -- do it yourself http://antoine.villeret.free.fr 2012/12/28 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: > > Post a request to pd-dev and send your ssh key, here are the details: > http://puredata.info/docs/developer/PdLab > > .hc > > On 12/28/2012 07:20 AM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >> hi, >> >> it's sounds great ! >> should I register somewhere ? >> >> + >> a >> -- >> do it yourself >> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >> >> >> 2012/12/27 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>> >>> Hey Antoine, >>> >>> If you are willing to maintain Mac OS X and/or Windows ports, you can get >>> access to the PdLab build machines, and I'm willing to install opencv 2.4.x >>> on those machines. Basically, once everything is setup, you'll just need >>> to make the builds on the various platforms by doing 'make'. >>> >>> .hc >>> >>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 10:35 AM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>> >>>> no idea, there wasn't any official opencv framework in the past, only >>>> some make by people who needs it but never maintained nor updated... >>>> so I think it still the case... >>>> people have to wait for someone who wants to make a framework, or to >>>> build it themselves >>>> but, are the packages available for Mac OS X through a package manager >>>> with automatic installation like in Debian ? >>>> if no, people have to build package by hand if I understood correctly >>>> so if they can build a pd package it will be very easy for them to >>>> build OpenCV 2 from lastest release >>>> which is I think a better idea than using an old and obsolete OpenCV >>>> Framework... >>>> >>>> I don't have a Mac OS X machine under hand for now to test it >>>> but I think it's not really hard to make a step by step tutorial to >>>> make pix_opencv working on OS X with a tarball and some dev tool >>>> >>>> -- >>>> do it yourself >>>> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >>>> >>>> >>>> 2012/12/27 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>> >>>>> Ah ok, makes sense. What about opencv2 on Mac OS X? How is that handled? >>>>> >>>>> .hc >>>>> >>>>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 10:03 AM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> the default make install command from git repo install gem into >>>>>> /usr/local/include >>>>>> -- >>>>>> do it yourself >>>>>> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2012/12/27 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What installs the headers into /usr/local/include/Gem? The Gem package >>>>>>> in Debian/Ubuntu installs into /usr/include/Gem, so -I/usr/include/Gem >>>>>>> needs to be there. If some standard installer installs into >>>>>>> /usr/local/include/Gem, then I'd keep -I /usr/local/include/Gem in >>>>>>> CFLAGS_linux, otherwise I'd leave it to people to edit the Makefile to >>>>>>> add their custom Gem header install locations. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> .hc >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Dec 27, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> thansk for that, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> i had to change the CLAGS_linux variable (line 39) to : >>>>>>>> CFLAGS_linux = -I/usr/local/include/Gem `pkg-config --cflags opencv` >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> to make it >>>>>>>> but I don't know if I should or not push it to the SVN ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> do it yourself >>>>>>>> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> 2012/12/27 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Ok, I committed a Makefile based on the Library Template. It does >>>>>>>>> not build pix_opencv_contours.cc pix_opencv_matchshape.cc, they both >>>>>>>>> gave a big dump of roughly the same errors. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The template Makefile will handle a lot of things automatically for >>>>>>>>> you, the trade-off is that its strict about certain things: every >>>>>>>>> object must have a help patch, all example files must go into >>>>>>>>> examples/, etc. The template Makefile is really easy to make a >>>>>>>>> Debian package from too. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> really easy why not, but how ? >>>>>>>> if I should make it myself I need a little more help... >>>>>>>> the links on the page : >>>>>>>> http://puredata.info/dev/DebianPackagingStructure >>>>>>>> are not broken but doesn't point to the right discussion... >>>>>>>> anyway, I found the discussion and others but can't find anywhere a >>>>>>>> good step by step howto build debian package >>>>>>>> sorry, this will be my first debian package :-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * is pix_opencv_opticalflow.pd an example or an abstraction? If its >>>>>>>>> an example, it should go into examples/ with of.frag. If its an >>>>>>>>> abstraction, it should have a help patch. Or if its just a text >>>>>>>>> patch, it can be left out of the Makefile and left as is. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I forgot this one... >>>>>>>> I placed it in the examples/ folder for now >>>>>>>> but working on optical flow externals is in my todo list (with gpu and >>>>>>>> opencl) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> * pix_opencv_blobtrack.cc seems to require opencv2, does that mean >>>>>>>>> both opencv 1.2 and opencv 2.x need to be installed? Is there an >>>>>>>>> OpenCV2 framework for Mac OS X? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> yes, most of recent and future externals take advantages of the new >>>>>>>> C++ API of OpenCV 2.x >>>>>>>> OpenCV 2 releases are distribute as a tarball for Linux/OSX, there is >>>>>>>> no Framework on the download page http://opencv.org/downloads.html >>>>>>>> and a quick search lead to multiple posts over the internet on how to >>>>>>>> build it by hand (which very easy since the new cmake system) >>>>>>>> and also a precompiled package : >>>>>>>> http://vislab.cs.vt.edu/~vislab/wiki/images/4/44/OpenCV2.0.dmg >>>>>>>> found here : http://opencv.willowgarage.com/wiki/Mac_OS_X_OpenCV_Port >>>>>>>> but it's obsolete >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ++ >>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Mac OS X, I was building against Pd-extended 0.43 since pix_opencv >>>>>>>>> uses some new Gem headers that aren't included in Pd-extended 0.42. >>>>>>>>> The template Makefile automatically looks in Pd-extended if its in >>>>>>>>> /Applications. If you want to choose which version of Pd-extende to >>>>>>>>> build against: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> make >>>>>>>>> PD_PATH=/Applications/Pd-0.43.4-extended-20121223.app/Contents/Resource >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> .hc >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Dec 26, 2012, at 3:11 PM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> hello, >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I made an update today on pix_opencv with an improvement of >>>>>>>>>> pix_opencv_contours which is now a complete replacement of other >>>>>>>>>> pix_opencv_contours_* objects >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> and I sent a private mail to Lluis even if I found some old mails on >>>>>>>>>> this list by him and i never get any answer >>>>>>>>>> so maybe you can go ahead according to the "one week consensus" ? >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> there is actually one strange make rule, its for a custom blobtracker >>>>>>>>>> but I will change this as soon as i have time >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> merry chrismas to all >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> cheers >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>> do it yourself >>>>>>>>>> http://antoine.villeret.free.fr >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> 2012/12/13 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 12:21 PM, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> 2012/12/13 Hans-Christoph Steiner <h...@at.or.at>: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 13, 2012, at 3:43 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hash: SHA1 >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2012-12-12 19:42, Antoine Villeret wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i've already tried to make a C++ external from the template but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> i >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never reach something which works so if you have a working >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> template >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> please let me know >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pix-opencv depends on external libraries, and afaik often needs >>>>>>>>>>>>>> specific versions thereof. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i think it is a perfect candidate to *not* use a template >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Makefile but >>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead use something more intelligent like autotools, scons, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> cmake,...which reminds me that it already does use autoconf >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and what about including it in Gem ? as it depends on it (and it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> may depends on very new feature such as ROI soon) i think it's a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better choice >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> pix-opencv is developed by different people than Gem. i think it >>>>>>>>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> good to keep the repositories (and user-management) separate. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so: i'd rather not have pix-opencv be "part" of Gem. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> but: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> i agree that pix-opencv could be made more readily available to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> users. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it might be a good idea to distribute it together with >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Gem-releases. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> so: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> the build-system needs little changes to build a pix_opencv >>>>>>>>>>>>>> found in >>>>>>>>>>>>>> extra/ (basically, uncomment the relevant lines at the end of >>>>>>>>>>>>>> extra/configure.ac and add a line to extra/Makefile.am) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> we could then create a script that pulls in pix-opencv to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> extra/pix_opencv before the builds are actually started. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> autotools are very useful for detecting platform differences and >>>>>>>>>>>>> making the build system respond differently based on that, like >>>>>>>>>>>>> handling multiple optional dependencies like in Gem. For the >>>>>>>>>>>>> case you describe, that works well with the template Makefile. >>>>>>>>>>>>> For an object that requires a specific library, add it to >>>>>>>>>>>>> LDFLAGS. If that library not installed, it'll throw an error, >>>>>>>>>>>>> which is what you want since the object requires that library. >>>>>>>>>>>>> pix_opencv requires opencv, and does nothing without it, so no >>>>>>>>>>>>> autotools necessary. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know anything about autotool and it looks like quite dark >>>>>>>>>>>> for >>>>>>>>>>>> me so if i can avoid another headache it's better :-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> As for version differences, I generally find it way too much work >>>>>>>>>>>>> to support building against various versions of the API and just >>>>>>>>>>>>> choose one and standardize on it. Then, once this lib is widely >>>>>>>>>>>>> distributed it could be worth building against different versions >>>>>>>>>>>>> of opencv if there is demand. First get it out there for the >>>>>>>>>>>>> majority of users, then deal with any relevant edge cases, >>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise you are likely to spend lots of time dealing with edge >>>>>>>>>>>>> cases that might not really be relevant. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> My problem with autotools is that very few people know how to >>>>>>>>>>>>> modify it, so the build system then rots because its not >>>>>>>>>>>>> maintained and other issues. I've seen this happen to a lot of >>>>>>>>>>>>> autotools build systems in Pd projects over the years. For >>>>>>>>>>>>> example, Gem's autotools setup has gotten so complex, its almost >>>>>>>>>>>>> impenetrable for me, and I've done a fair amount of autotools. >>>>>>>>>>>>> This is one reason to not include every object in Gem. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> The Makefile that's there is already quite close to working. I'm >>>>>>>>>>>>> happy to commit fixes to get it working if that's OK with the >>>>>>>>>>>>> maintainers. I've committed to pix_opencv before. Indeed I did >>>>>>>>>>>>> this work back in 2009 but sevy objected so it was reverted and >>>>>>>>>>>>> abandoned: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> http://pure-data.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/pure-data/trunk/externals/pix_opencv/Makefile?r1=12563&r2=12571 >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I think we should ask Lluis for that >>>>>>>>>>>> with the current Makefile in the SVN man should have opencv >= 2.3 >>>>>>>>>>>> (some externals won't compile with previous OpenCV version) but >>>>>>>>>>>> there >>>>>>>>>>>> is not check about that I think >>>>>>>>>>>> and I can build with >>>>>>>>>>>> ./configure --with-pd=<PATH> --with-gem=<PATH> >>>>>>>>>>>> make >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The Makefile equivalent of this is: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> make PD_SRC=<PATH> GEM_SRC=<PATH> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Otherwise it'll look in the default installed locations for the >>>>>>>>>>> headers. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> but only tested on Ubuntu >>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know if it could build on other linux distro and even less >>>>>>>>>>>> on >>>>>>>>>>>> Mac OS X and Windows >>>>>>>>>>>> Should fixing that Makefile.in be a starting point to distrute the >>>>>>>>>>>> package ? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Let me know and i'll do it. Is Lluis on this list? Yes, I can >>>>>>>>>>> include 'make osx_tarball' so its easy to make the tarball for >>>>>>>>>>> releases. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> .hc >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>> _______________________________________________ GEM-dev mailing list GEM-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/gem-dev
