Hi Paul, Yes, pakages contain examples. And as far as I know, plugins depend on what you selected in CMake. So if you disable everything (or if CMake doesn't find the dependencies), then your package will have no plugins.
Sukender PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/ Le Wed, 11 Feb 2009 21:03:59 +0100, Paul Martz <[email protected]> a écrit: > Just a question regarding the contents of the binary packages... I assume > they contain: > * All of core OSG (osg, osgUtil, osgDB, osgViewer) > * All the NodeKits (osgShadow, osgSim, osgGA, etc.) > * All the applications (osgviewer, osgconv, etc.) > > Questions: > * Do the binaries also contain all the examples? > * What about viewer examples for the various windowing systems (wx, qt, > etc.)? > * And which (if any) plugins were excluded? > > This info is for the new Quick Start Guide. Thanks. > > Paul Martz > Skew Matrix Software LLC > http://www.skew-matrix.com > +1 303 859 9466 > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sukender > Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2009 8:59 AM > To: OpenSceneGraph Users > Subject: Re: [osg-users] 2.8.0-rc5 VC8 packages available + questions > > Hi JS, > > Well, the 'all' package was just for me. As package maintainers, I think we > should provide separate packages as you say, or averything ('all' + > separated). > > Sukender > PVLE - Lightweight cross-platform game engine - http://pvle.sourceforge.net/ > > > Le Wed, 11 Feb 2009 14:39:52 +0100, Jean-Sébastien Guay > <[email protected]> a écrit: > >> Hi Sukender, >> >>> 1. Both debug and release packages contain generated documentation (So > you have a "Overwrite file?" prompt from the unarchiver une unziping both). > Do you think we should disable the inclusion (or building) of the doc when > in debug, or is it safer to keep as it is? >> >> I would vote for a different approach: upload separate packages >> instead of the -all package. That way people can download what they >> need, and "automatically" the documentation will not be there twice. >> >> But if we really want to keep the -all package as the official one, >> then I would say that only the debug package should contain the docs. >> To do any development on Windows you need both the release and debug >> packages, but if you only want to run osgviewer you will only download >> release, and in that case the docs are of no use to you. >> >>> 2. I saw that "Cygwin" and "nmake" sections on > http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg/wiki/Community/PackageMaintainers > ... Is there any difference between *binaries* generated from MinGW-gcc and > Cygwin-gcc? And for nmake, I guess it uses the MSVC compiler, right? So > binaries are not different from "pure" MSVC ones, or am I wrong? >>> This could be confusing: if you use an "nmake" build, will this be a VC7, > VC8, or VC9 one? Moreover, I thought that Cygwin, MinGW and nmake packages > are named against the compiler (it shows "gcc" and "vc" in the name). So I > suggest these sections to be removed, but I just need confirmation. >> >> I'm the one who put those sections, I don't even know if they're needed. >> You could remove them and someone else can add them in the future if >> they're really needed. And yes, someone else (Mattias?) said that >> nmake will use msvc to build so it's the same as msvc, so we can just >> remove that one. >> >> Thanks, >> >> J-S > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org > > _______________________________________________ > osg-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org _______________________________________________ osg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openscenegraph.org/listinfo.cgi/osg-users-openscenegraph.org
