Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
Hi, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > is there a more reliable way to communicate this to you? Yes, a reproducable test case. A detailed instruction on how to reproduce the problem. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts?
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 07:12:18PM +0200, Michael Schumacher wrote: > Carol Spears wrote: > >configure: WARNING: --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts? > >*** > >*** --enable-gimp-console is for crazy hackers only! > >*** The build will fail badly in the app/ directory. > >*** You have been warned ;) > >*** > > > >what is up with this? > > AFAIK this is for a version of GIMP that doesn't require GTK+. At least, > that's what I've been told when asking the same question. > it is my opinion that leaving the word "crazy" there for too long, it becomes the norm and everyone gets, you know, bored. perhaps we should unicode a different character which would be an apostrophe on top of a period. would adding a different unicode character be an easier way to make this crazy message look new and exciting without working the gimp developers too much? maybe put something like sigrot onto the make file? carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: [Gimp-user] Install Gimp 2.0
Hi, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > my question was about the logic which lead to this condition of this > gimp and its ability to install different versions, side by side. > like the good old days. I am sorry but I think I answered that question. Which part of the answer did you not understand? I've quoted my answer below. > > "That's the reason that gimp-2.1 cannot be installed into the same > > prefix as gimp-2.0. It's supposed to replace it. Currently there's > > the temporary condition that gimp-2.1 installs quite some things > > into directories versioned as 2.1. This is supposed to be changed > > back to 2.0 when gimp-2.2 is ready." I admit that "temporary condition" probably doesn't make much sense but that was me using your words. What I was trying to say is that the current behaviour of installing things into directories versioned "2.1" is going to be reverted for 2.2. If possible, everything will go into the same directories that gimp-2.0 uses. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 07:19:30PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > when i Edit-->Copy from an image with a 400% view (partial view so > > imagine the scroll bars and the limited area showing) and Paste this > > layer to an image with a 25% view (imagine the smaller view where the > > whole image is in view) the 400% portion that can be seen is what gets > > pasted; not the whole layer that was being copied. > > Are you sure? I cannot reproduce this, neither with gimp-2.0 nor > gimp-2.1. And I can also not think of a way this could possibly > happen. The displayed area is in no way connected to the > selection. The part of the code that does copy and paste doesn't know > anything about the GimpDisplay and it's scale ratio and offsets. > the fact that you cannot reproduce it is somehow assuring to me. not as reassuring as a bug report number or search words to more efficiently research it myself. would screenshots be enough for you to believe i am having this problem? i am even stuck on the best way to show this problem as it really all could be created by me. believing my screenshots you would have to believe that i would never fake a problem with the gimp. is there a more reliable way to communicate this to you? carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: [Gimp-user] Install Gimp 2.0
hello, On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 07:22:28PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > i was trying to restate the following quote from a previous email in > > this thread: > > > > "That's the reason that gimp-2.1 cannot be installed into the same > > prefix as gimp-2.0. It's supposed to replace it. Currently there's the > > temporary condition that gimp-2.1 installs quite some things into > > directories versioned as 2.1. This is supposed to be changed back to 2.0 > > when gimp-2.2 is ready." > > > > restate it and suggest a quicker fix like a few others i have seen. > > > > this quote i pasted is not about a naming problem? > > No, it isn't, there is no naming problem. Everything including the > "temporay condition" is completely intentional. > okay, i thought that the job of not actually answering questions was given to dave neary, but i have been wrong before. first of all, temporay or temporary and second of all, you just said that you did not answer my question here. my question was about the logic which lead to this condition of this gimp and its ability to install different versions, side by side. like the good old days. carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts?
Hi, Dave Neary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Carol Spears wrote: > > configure: WARNING: --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts? > > *** > > *** --enable-gimp-console is for crazy hackers only! > > *** The build will fail badly in the app/ directory. > > *** You have been warned ;) > > *** > > what is up with this? > > --enable-gimp-console builds a gimp-console application which doesn't > link with gtk+ at all. In theory, you can run a GIMP without any > display (this is impossible in batch mode). It was never fully > finished and so it doesn't work, and is for crazy hackers only. Thus > the warning :) Right. But there's hope that we get this done for GIMP-2.2. At the moment it just simply doesn't link at all. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
Hi, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > when i Edit-->Copy from an image with a 400% view (partial view so > imagine the scroll bars and the limited area showing) and Paste this > layer to an image with a 25% view (imagine the smaller view where the > whole image is in view) the 400% portion that can be seen is what gets > pasted; not the whole layer that was being copied. Are you sure? I cannot reproduce this, neither with gimp-2.0 nor gimp-2.1. And I can also not think of a way this could possibly happen. The displayed area is in no way connected to the selection. The part of the code that does copy and paste doesn't know anything about the GimpDisplay and it's scale ratio and offsets. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts?
Hi, Carol Spears wrote: configure: WARNING: --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts? *** *** --enable-gimp-console is for crazy hackers only! *** The build will fail badly in the app/ directory. *** You have been warned ;) *** what is up with this? --enable-gimp-console builds a gimp-console application which doesn't link with gtk+ at all. In theory, you can run a GIMP without any display (this is impossible in batch mode). It was never fully finished and so it doesn't work, and is for crazy hackers only. Thus the warning :) Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary Phenix Engineering 110 ave Jean Jaures, 69007 Lyon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts?
Carol Spears wrote: configure: WARNING: --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts? *** *** --enable-gimp-console is for crazy hackers only! *** The build will fail badly in the app/ directory. *** You have been warned ;) *** what is up with this? AFAIK this is for a version of GIMP that doesn't require GTK+. At least, that's what I've been told when asking the same question. HTH, Michael -- The GIMP > http://www.gimp.org| IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/gimp Sodipodi > http://sodipodi.sf.net | IRC: irc://irc.gimp.org/sodipodi ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts?
configure: WARNING: --enable-gimp-console... are you nuts? *** *** --enable-gimp-console is for crazy hackers only! *** The build will fail badly in the app/ directory. *** You have been warned ;) *** what is up with this? carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
hello again, On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 02:00:07PM +0200, Sven Neumann wrote: > Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > i have been having a problem with my last cvs version of gimp. > > > > i got it after it changed to gimp-2.0. there is a problem with it. > > > > i need the one without the Edit -->Copy bug i read about > > Would you mind to explain what bug you are refering to? If I remember > correctly the only confusion about Edit->Copy was that I mistakenly > used "Selection->Copy" in one of my mails. > when i Edit-->Copy from an image with a 400% view (partial view so imagine the scroll bars and the limited area showing) and Paste this layer to an image with a 25% view (imagine the smaller view where the whole image is in view) the 400% portion that can be seen is what gets pasted; not the whole layer that was being copied. carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] status report from the development branch
Hi, it's that time of the week again, so here's the weekly status report from the GIMP HEAD branch. There isn't too much exciting news this week because most of the work was done on finishing stuff started earlier. But let's see ... Mitch and me added a GimpContainerView interface that is implemented by the various container treeviews. The new GimpContainerCombobox provides a replacement for GimpContainerMenu which used to be based on the deprecated GtkOptionMenu widget. Mitch changed all those buttons in the dockables to connect to GtkActions. This makes the button sensitivity update automatically just like the menus do and it assures that clicking the buttons does exactly the same as choosing the respective item from the menus. Since this allows the buttons and the menus to share the same callbacks, it makes the code a lot cleaner. I've continued work on HIG-ifying the core. Some of the more complex dialogs will need a more thorough review though. I've also ported almost all plug-ins from GtkFileSelection to GtkFileChooser. Also HIG-ified those plug-ins while I was on it. Mitch improved configurability of the toolbox from the "Tools" dialog. I've changed all file load/save plug-ins to use the new menu registration API, changed their menu entries to be more descriptive (and translatable) and added mime-type information for most file plug-ins. The thumbnails created by GIMP now include mime type information if the file procedure used to load or save the file provided it. Mitch reenabled tearoff menus. This is probably the last regression that was introduced with the port to GtkUIManager. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
Hi, Carol Spears <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > i have been having a problem with my last cvs version of gimp. > > i got it after it changed to gimp-2.0. there is a problem with it. > > i need the one without the Edit -->Copy bug i read about Would you mind to explain what bug you are refering to? If I remember correctly the only confusion about Edit->Copy was that I mistakenly used "Selection->Copy" in one of my mails. Sven ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Spamcop problem
Hi, Carol Spears wrote: On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:21:51AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: 128.32.112.247 is shill.xcf.berkeley.edu, which is presumably some kind of gateway for gimp.org mail. So getting onto spamcop's blacklist probably means that gimp.org mails aren't going to be too reliable for a while. great. what does this mean about seemingly good information about cvs versions coming from gimp.org addresses? Presumably it means that your ISp doesn't use spamcop to block spam, unlike brix's university. When I said that they would be unreliable, I meant that it may be difficult to send mail to gimp.org addresses - since the ISPs/company servers/university servers may be using spamcop. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary Phenix Engineering 110 ave Jean Jaures, 69007 Lyon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Spamcop problem
Salute again, On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:21:51AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > I just sent a mail to a gimp.org alias, and it bounced with the > following problem: > > >This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). > > > >A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its > >recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >(generated from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > >SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >host mail1.iha.dk [130.225.184.39]: 554 Service unavailable; Client > >host [128.32.112.247] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see > >http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?128.32.112.247 > > 128.32.112.247 is shill.xcf.berkeley.edu, which is presumably some kind > of gateway for gimp.org mail. So getting onto spamcop's blacklist > probably means that gimp.org mails aren't going to be too reliable for a > while. > > Does anyone know what's wrong with beta.gimp.org at the moment? It's > mostly down, but it was up for a while yesterday evening. > great. what does this mean about seemingly good information about cvs versions coming from gimp.org addresses? carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
well, salute maybe On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 09:50:43AM +0200, Dave Neary wrote: > Carol Spears wrote: > >2) a cvs command that will request a version from a calendar date and > > not only the version (as bex and i documented fairly well on wgo) > > cvs up -D "-mm-dd HH:MM" gimp > well, see. this is beautiful. thank you. > You might prefer sticking with the gimp-2.0 branch, though > > cvs up -r gimp-2-0 gimp > you know, i forgot that people were fixing bugs in this version as well. instead of my rant about dejavu with weird bugs that seem more difficult to make accidentally than on purpose and thank you for being willing to work on the 2.0 branch as you are. dejavu is disturbing even without a geek movie. perhaps i should search out the information in the Changelog to find the bugsmith? > I usually have 2 copies checked out of CVS in different directories: > cvs co -r gimp-2-0 -d gimp-2.0 gimp > cvs co -d gimp-2.1 gimp > > That'll give you a CVS HEAD version and a stable branch version, in > gimp-2.1 and gimp-2.0 respectively. > okay, now you are showing off. nice. better you had done this when i needed you to, but whatever. thank you, carol ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Spamcop problem
Hi all, I just sent a mail to a gimp.org alias, and it bounced with the following problem: This message was created automatically by mail delivery software (Exim). A message that you sent could not be delivered to one or more of its recipients. This is a permanent error. The following address(es) failed: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (generated from [EMAIL PROTECTED]) SMTP error from remote mailer after RCPT TO:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: host mail1.iha.dk [130.225.184.39]: 554 Service unavailable; Client host [128.32.112.247] blocked using bl.spamcop.net; Blocked - see http://www.spamcop.net/bl.shtml?128.32.112.247 128.32.112.247 is shill.xcf.berkeley.edu, which is presumably some kind of gateway for gimp.org mail. So getting onto spamcop's blacklist probably means that gimp.org mails aren't going to be too reliable for a while. Does anyone know what's wrong with beta.gimp.org at the moment? It's mostly down, but it was up for a while yesterday evening. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary Phenix Engineering 110 ave Jean Jaures, 69007 Lyon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] Edit -->Copy confusion
Hi Carol, Carol Spears wrote: 2) a cvs command that will request a version from a calendar date and not only the version (as bex and i documented fairly well on wgo) cvs up -D "-mm-dd HH:MM" gimp You might prefer sticking with the gimp-2.0 branch, though cvs up -r gimp-2-0 gimp I usually have 2 copies checked out of CVS in different directories: cvs co -r gimp-2-0 -d gimp-2.0 gimp cvs co -d gimp-2.1 gimp That'll give you a CVS HEAD version and a stable branch version, in gimp-2.1 and gimp-2.0 respectively. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary Phenix Engineering 110 ave Jean Jaures, 69007 Lyon ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
