Re: [Gimp-developer] Size entry widgets..
On Wednesday, 27 Mar 2002, Øyvind Kolås wrote: > * My workflow for posters that will be printed on a laser printer is: > - make a new grayscale image with the same size ratio as A4/A3 > - fullfil the design > - scale the image up to the full res of the 'printable area' > - manually newsprintifying, dithering etc. the image down to > 1bit Warning: the newsprint plugin does nothing to avoid moire artefacts other than offer an antialias option. It doesn't use supercells to reduce rounding errors. Therefore, if you're using it to produce 1-bit output (and hence can't use antialiasing) then you should expect poor quality output. The newsprint plugin is suitable for producing (eg) silk-screens for t-shirt designs, or special effects, but not for printed flyers, in my opinion. Austin ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
RE: [Gimp-developer] amp photoshop curves
On Friday, 29 Mar 2002, regis rampnoux wrote: > You can load the files with the plug-ins amp4gimp which is in the > registery. (I found yesterday a bug but you can use it ...) > There is no save option at this moment. If the amp format is simple enough, why don't we just make it the default format for Gimp curves too? Austin ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: amp photoshop curves
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-04-04 at 1143.34 +0100): > If the amp format is simple enough, why don't we just make it the > default format for Gimp curves too? The problem I see is that it means not under GIMP people control (basicaly about improving, I doubt the format would change). For example, when moving to 16 bits or other modes, I do not see PS AMP 256 entries LUT or GIMP 17 entry curves as the way to go. It sounds absurd to work in such high mode and then limit other things to brute approximations. Or think about supporting extra channels, AMP only supports one or three channels. Leaving room for improvement should be taken into account. I think it is better to write an external converter (uum, it already exists :] ) than support two formats or discard current (is there any gimp2amp?) and then try to workaround problems in the future. GSR ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Curves files
On 04-Apr-2002 Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote: > example, when moving to 16 bits or other modes, I do not see PS AMP > 256 entries LUT or GIMP 17 entry curves as the way to go. It sounds > absurd to work in such high mode and then limit other things to brute > approximations. I have a question about this limitation: why the Gimp spline curves is limited to 17 entries and the procedure gimp-curves-spline use a 32 items array of points? May be it is not the same goal but that is the difference? -- http://regisr.regix.com/ portail photo http://www.regix.net magazine http://www.regix.com/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Curves files
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-04-04 at 1942.21 +0200):
> I have a question about this limitation: why the Gimp spline curves is
> limited to 17 entries and the procedure gimp-curves-spline use a 32
> items array of points?
> May be it is not the same goal but that is the difference?
Code from the file, it reads 16 pairs:
for (j = 0; j < 17; j++)
{
fields = fscanf (f, "%d %d ", &index[i][j], &value[i][j]);
if (fields != 2)
{
g_print ("fields != 2");
return FALSE;
}
}
Umm, hehehe, it reads 16 pairs, x and y values, not 17 (< 17, not <=
17). Sorry, my fault. I am still investigating why 16 and not other
value (could be 256 as amp files, and avoid the x value). Must be
something about the curve widget, I guess, but today I am a bit
"obtuse" with my grep and coding skills.
GSR
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Curves files
On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 10:20:40PM +0200, Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-04-04 at 1942.21 +0200):
> > I have a question about this limitation: why the Gimp spline curves is
> > limited to 17 entries and the procedure gimp-curves-spline use a 32
> > items array of points?
> > May be it is not the same goal but that is the difference?
>
> Code from the file, it reads 16 pairs:
>
> for (j = 0; j < 17; j++)
> {
> fields = fscanf (f, "%d %d ", &index[i][j], &value[i][j]);
> if (fields != 2)
> {
> g_print ("fields != 2");
> return FALSE;
> }
> }
>
> Umm, hehehe, it reads 16 pairs, x and y values, not 17 (< 17, not <=
> 17). Sorry, my fault. I am still investigating why 16 and not other
> value (could be 256 as amp files, and avoid the x value). Must be
> something about the curve widget, I guess, but today I am a bit
> "obtuse" with my grep and coding skills.
>
More than you think ;-)
from 0 to 16, that's seventeen values!
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Re: Curves files
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2002-04-04 at 2309.59 +0200): > > something about the curve widget, I guess, but today I am a bit > > "obtuse" with my grep and coding skills. > More than you think ;-) > from 0 to 16, that's seventeen values! Can I delete this day? :] GSR ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] Libgimpwidgets, libgimptool etc and ELF features
There is a slight problem with the code in HEAD GIMP, that manifests itself at least on Windows, but probably also on other non-ELF platforms (AIX, others?). On Windows, when building shared libraries (DLLs), one must use the -no-undefined switch to libtool. I.e. there can be no references that are resolved only at run-time when the shared library is attached to a process. All external references must be to a known "module" (either another DLL or the EXE itself that will use the DLL). In libgimpwidgets, the problematic functions are gimp_palette_get_foreground(), gimp_palette_get_background(), gimp_standard_help_func(), etc. On ELF systems, I assume it works so that when libgimpwidgets is used by a plug-in, those entries are resolved from the shared libgimp already attached to the process. When libgimpwidgets is used by the gimp application, the entries are resolved from the application itself. Now, for libgimpwidgets, Hans Breuer already has implemented a workaround (the libgimp-glue.c file), containing proxy entries for said functions, which call a helper function that effectively does the dynamic linking "by hand". But this file is Windows-specific. However, similar style of programming has also recently been introduced in libgimptool, and maybe elsewhere (I have just recently started looking at HEAD, only got this far yet). Using a similar glue file as libgimp-glue.c, and keeping it up-to-date, adding proxy functions as needed, does not seem like the Right Way to handle this. Before this goes out of hand, could we please agree to stop assuming ELF features? Maybe even use -no-undefined on all platforms? To handle the dynamic linking either to libgimp or the gimp exe, why not use the features that GModule provides? g_module_symbol() on the result from g_module_open (NULL, G_MODULE_BIND_LAZY) searches the currently loaded shared libraries, *and* the application. Works also on Windows. --tml ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
RE: [Gimp-developer] Re: Curves files
On 04-Apr-2002 Guillermo S. Romero / Familia Romero wrote: >> from 0 to 16, that's seventeen values! > Can I delete this day? :] Days are deleted when deprecated ;-) But why 17? ( why not? ) My question was why 17 points in curves.c and gimp_curves_spline accept an array of 32 points ? What are the diff between the curves in curves.c and color_cmds.c ? -- http://regisr.regix.com/ portail photo http://www.regix.net magazine http://www.regix.com/ ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
What is our stand on using the name Linux or the name GNU/Linux. For those who do not know: the OS Linux was built by Linux Torvalds in 1991. He basically only built a kernel and used parts of the GNU project to pad it out to a complete OS. People started calling the whole OS Linux. At this the founder of GNU, Richard Stallman, balked, because he feels that the OS is as much his as Linus' and that he deserves credit for it. He would like to see that credit in the shape of the OS being called GNU/Linux rather than just Linux. I grepped the current stable CVS (well, that of a few weeks ago) and found that a few files (mostly of the documentation type) mention Linux instead of GNU/Linux. Should we change these instances to GNU/Linux? -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
my 2 euro cents : "Branko Collin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > For those who do not know: the OS Linux was built by Linux Torvalds > in 1991. He basically only built a kernel and used parts of the GNU > project to pad it out to a complete OS. People started calling the > whole OS Linux. At this the founder of GNU, Richard Stallman, balked, > because he feels that the OS is as much his as Linus' and that he > deserves credit for it. He would like to see that credit in the shape > of the OS being called GNU/Linux rather than just Linux. well, i don't agree at 100%: rms arguments've drawbacks. gnu softwares're NOT the majority of free softwares in a distro. eg, in mandrake, only looking at sources rpms, they're: - GPL: 851 (of which an estimated one third is from gnu) - LGPL: 91 - BSD: 87 - various free licences: 62 - Artistic: 47 - MIT: 35 - public domain : 29 - freeware: 12 - mpl: 13 - Apache: 11 - OpenSource: 4 - qpl:4 - opl: 2 - fdl: 2 so should we speak of gnu-bsd-mpl-qpl-artistic/linux ? or, as gpl softwares number is greater than gnu/fsf ones, should we speak of gpl/linux ? let do not be semantic fanatics :-) important is to make free software, to make people use them, not to auto-flaming the communauty ! rms, the fsf and the gnu project've been a big step in the right direction and we should be thanks them forever for that; but they're not the source of ALL free softwares: somes cames from bsd-land, others're released under various free licences, ... a free software can be released under the gpl without be part of the gnu project :-) eg: linux sources're as big as gcc or glibc ones, but smaller than XFree86 ones which're bigger than the three first ones. the three first ones're gpled but the fourth is released under a MIT license. only gcc and glibc're part of the gnu project. despite not being released under gpl nor being part of the gnu project, XFree86 is still a free software. afaic gnu/linux is as good as linux: they're both mis-named :-) > I grepped the current stable CVS (well, that of a few weeks ago) and > found that a few files (mostly of the documentation type) mention > Linux instead of GNU/Linux. afaic, both're correct even if they're not 100% correct. the gnu/linux spelling has the advantage to highlight the free software ethic. nothing more. -- Still untested beyond 'it compiles' (davej) ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 01:15:17AM +0200, Thierry Vignaud wrote: > my 2 euro cents : > > "Branko Collin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > For those who do not know: the OS Linux was built by Linux Torvalds > > in 1991. He basically only built a kernel and used parts of the GNU > > project to pad it out to a complete OS. People started calling the > > whole OS Linux. At this the founder of GNU, Richard Stallman, balked, > > because he feels that the OS is as much his as Linus' and that he > > deserves credit for it. He would like to see that credit in the shape > > of the OS being called GNU/Linux rather than just Linux. > > well, i don't agree at 100%: rms arguments've drawbacks. > gnu softwares're NOT the majority of free softwares in a distro. > eg, in mandrake, only looking at sources rpms, they're: [snip list] > so should we speak of gnu-bsd-mpl-qpl-artistic/linux ? > or, as gpl softwares number is greater than gnu/fsf ones, should we > speak of gpl/linux ? A distribution is much more than an operation system. If you just look at the core components that make up the OS (I'm sure that there will be plenty of contention regarding what these are ;-) then you have a Linux kernel, and GNU tools. Most of the other programs are not essential--a bare bones system will be mostly GNU stuff. When talking about the kernel, `Linux' is appropriate, but when talking about the /operating system/ as a whole `GNU/Linux' is more accurate, especially since you could replace the kernel with Hurd or BSD and from the POV of the user (or programmer) there would be little noticeable change but the GNU part would still be there. The GNU tools are the actual part the user (and programmer) will interact with, be it bash, grep, gcc or glibc. Just my tuppence, Roger -- Roger Leigh ** Registration Number: 151826, http://counter.li.org ** Need Epson Stylus Utilities? http://gimp-print.sourceforge.net/ GPG Public Key: 0x25BFB848 available on public keyservers ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
Roger Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > so should we speak of gnu-bsd-mpl-qpl-artistic/linux ?
> > or, as gpl softwares number is greater than gnu/fsf ones, should
> > we speak of gpl/linux ?
>
> A distribution is much more than an operation system. If you just
> look at the core components that make up the OS (I'm sure that there
> will be plenty of contention regarding what these are ;-) then you
> have a Linux kernel, and GNU tools.
looking at what the mandrake basesystem package requires as minimal
system :
util-linux (swapon, mount, ...), e2fsprogs, lilo, initscripts,
console-tools, chkconfig, SysVinit, bdflush, kernel, losetup,
net-tools, modutils, procps, psmisc, rpm, sysklogd, are all linux
specific tools.
only fileutils, grep, findutils, glibc're a gnu project part.
there's other small gnu packages requires (time, textutils,
sh-utils...) but they're less important than previous ones.
> Most of the other programs are not essential--a bare bones system
> will be mostly GNU stuff.
looking at the above, this is *very*, *very* mitigated
> When talking about the kernel, `Linux' is appropriate, but when
> talking about the /operating system/ as a whole `GNU/Linux' is more
> accurate,
nope since gnu tools (yet an important part of the os) are'nt the
essential part.
neither is the bsd tools part. neither're gpl linux specific tools,
...
this is why i think linux and gnu/linux are equivalent (that is
they're equally mis-naming conventions) on a technical point.
on an ethic point, gnu/linux win since it hold a reference to the gnu
project and the fsf work.
on an historic point, linux win since everybody knows or had heard
about linux. but gnu/linux is rarer, despite rms advertising campaing.
don't misunderstand me: i respect a lot stallman's work; contrary to
many (mis-educated?) people, i don't see him as a fanatic; i see him
as the man who pushes the communauty in the right direction.
but on the gnu/linux point, the situation isn't as clear as he claims
it is.
why not forcing gnu/atheos, gnu/freebsd (for the ports part), ...
this is NOT coherent with forcing gnu/linux.
> especially since you could replace the kernel with Hurd or BSD and from
> the POV of the user (or programmer) there would be little noticeable
> change but the GNU part would still be there.
nope, you would get a lot of bsd stuff in the os core ...
> The GNU tools are the actual part the user (and programmer) will
> interact with, be it bash, grep, gcc or glibc.
depending of the view point.
as a packager[1] and a developper, i massively use gnu tools :
compilation chain (binutils, glibc, gcc), emacs (development, mail,
newsgroups, diary, ...) but not only them : i also uses gnus and
various others packages for emacs, rpm, the kernel, windowmaker,
screen,
but for an end user, kde or gnome're far important blocks of the os...
and're not part of the gnu project _despite_ they're gpl.
one cannot account {g,}ui as basic os componant.
then, yes glibc is a big part, but as important to bootstrap the
systems as the sysv infrastructure (init, boot scripts, ...),
packaging infrastructure (rpm/urpmi or dpkg/apt), system maintenance
tools (reiserfsprogs, e2fsprogs, jfs-utils, util-linux, ...).
there'sn't just a majority: the gnu part is as important as other
componants of the os :-)
[1] as gimp packager for mandrake, i'll have to package gimp-1.3.x for
contribs in not so many time ... :-)
--
Still untested beyond 'it compiles' (davej)
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
On 5 Apr 2002, at 3:20, Thierry Vignaud wrote: > but for an end user, kde or gnome're far important blocks of the os... > and're not part of the gnu project _despite_ they're gpl. The second paragraph on the GNOME homepage starts: "GNOME is part of the GNU project". -- branko collin [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
[Gimp-developer] GIMP_HOST
Can anyone tell me how I would supply the GIMP_HOST environment for a gimp-perl server. I am trying to execute a script that call's the server, but am getting a protocol error. From information that I have located it looks as if I need to set the auth in the GIMP_HOST. The following is the error message that I am getting. protocol error (1) at /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.6.0/i386-linux/Gimp/Net.pm line 66 ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
That depends a whole lot on what is in a bare bones system, does it not? I feel confident that I can build an entire bare bones system without having any programs in this system being from GNU packages. The GNU percentage depends highly on what the distribution provider puts into it. Since I deal mostly in 'bare bones' systems such as firewalls and tightened machines, the GNU percentage is very low. I would venture to say I have significantly more programs of other origin than GNU. Therefore, my definition of bare bones systems is opposite what yours is. Linux is Linux, what's added on after that is a varying figure. my two bytes on the subject, David Roger Leigh wrote: >[...] > > >A distribution is much more than an operation system. If you just look >at the core components that make up the OS (I'm sure that there will be >plenty of contention regarding what these are ;-) then you have a Linux >kernel, and GNU tools. Most of the other programs are not essential--a >bare bones system will be mostly GNU stuff. > >When talking about the kernel, `Linux' is appropriate, but when talking >about the /operating system/ as a whole `GNU/Linux' is more accurate, >especially since you could replace the kernel with Hurd or BSD and from >the POV of the user (or programmer) there would be little noticeable >change but the GNU part would still be there. The GNU tools are the >actual part the user (and programmer) will interact with, be it bash, >grep, gcc or glibc. > >Just my tuppence, >Roger > ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
Re: [Gimp-developer] GNU/Linux vs. Linux
Actually, his name is Linus Torvalds =) He got the X because of the X at the end of Unix. First he was planning to call it FreaX or something, as in FreeX and Freaks =) Just a bit of information, so that his name wouldn't be mistaken for his OS =) Have a nice day -Nas On Fri, 2002-04-05 at 01:46, Branko Collin wrote: > > What is our stand on using the name Linux or the name GNU/Linux. > > For those who do not know: the OS Linux was built by Linux Torvalds > in 1991. > > > -- > branko collin > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ___ > Gimp-developer mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > ___ Gimp-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.xcf.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
