I am well aware of how open source works having personally contributed
to a number of projects. Unfortunately my skills do not lie in the
area of C or C++ (I am unsure what the gimp is develpoed in).
Perhaps my question should have been With all of the spectacular
enhancements to the brush
I've decided to try my hand at compiling gimp from source so I can
look at possible development...
I normally use windows, but have used linux in the past as a desktop
(redhat and ubuntu) and use it for my servers.
I have an older PIII notebook I'm willing to blow away and use just
for this
Rob Antonishen wrote:
I've decided to try my hand at compiling gimp from source so I can
look at possible development...
can anyone suggest the shortest path from a blank
hard drive to a working gimp develpment environment?
Hi and welcome!
Here are my recommendations:
* Use a distro
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 18:57 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
* Use a distro which has packages for reasonably new versions of the
libraries GIMP depend on. Ubuntu 8.10 should work just fine.
* Don't install any dependencies you need to build yourself (typically
babl and GEGL) into
Sven Neumann wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 18:57 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
* Build unoptimized, debbugable versions of GLib and GTK+ so that you
can debug seamlessly through the GIMP/GTK+/GEGL/GLib/babl stack.
There's no need to do that. You can simply install the debug
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 20:25 +0100, Martin Nordholts wrote:
Unless I am mistaken these libraries have been compiled with
optimization enabled. Debugging code compiled with optimization doesn't
really work out, there's too much jumping-around going on.
This might be true in theory. But I
Rob Antonishen writes:
I have an older PIII notebook I'm willing to blow away and use just
for this purpose ... can anyone suggest the shortest path from a blank
hard drive to a working gimp develpment environment?
Sven Neumann writes:
It doesn't hurt to put babl and GEGL into /usr/local.
Hi,
On Thu, 2008-11-13 at 22:39 -0800, Akkana Peck wrote:
Unfortunately you may also have performance issues with GIMP 2.7
on a machine like that.
Are you implying that GIMP trunk is in any way slower than GIMP 2.6
(without enabling the GEGL projection, of course)? If you can show that
this
