No, no reason other than that's what I had on my machine when I compiled it :) I should update to 0.92.3 and put up the new version. I'd also like to figure out how to compile this for Linux/Windows. Before Hans bothered to make a makefile, I was just throwing my source into GEM's pixes directory and recompiling GEM as a whole so it would be embedded in the main GEM binary. I'll see if I can change the makefile and get it going on my Linux machine later today. If you don't mind, I may have a couple questions for you off-list if I run into any trouble.
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 12:02 AM, IOhannes m zmoelnig <zmoel...@iem.at> wrote: > On 2010-05-19 22:53, William Brent wrote: >> site? That one was built using GEM 0.92.2. If you haven't tried > > is there any reason to use gem-0.92.2? > minor releases only fix bugs, so 0.92.3 is (expteced to be) more stable > than 0.92.2. > to be precise, 0.92.3 fixed a memleak in the tracking code > (pix_multiblob though) and a crasher bug. > > ghmasdr > IOhannes > > -- William Brent www.williambrent.com “Great minds flock together” Conflations: conversational idiom for the 21st century www.conflations.com _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list