From: Tor Lillqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: lode leroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 01:48:10 +0300
lode leroy writes:
In fact, what happens is that when linking with ZLIB.DLL,
the exe expects
lode leroy writes:
The thing is that for compiling gimp from cvs, you need quite some expertise
in the autotools, libtool, aclocal, pkg-config etc to fix those
not-100%-working-together- distributed binaries...
Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains everything for
Tor Lillqvist wrote:
It would be possible, but wouldn't such a zipfile just create open up
the possibility for even more confusion when there would then be yet
another distribution of these libs?
Tor,
You're right. Alternative packages always open up the possibility
for more confusion
Von: lode leroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Tor Lillqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: lode leroy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: [Gimp-developer] GIMP 2.3.4
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2005 01:48:10 +0300
lode leroy writes:
In fact, what happens is that when
Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Monday, October 3, 2005, 16:49:59, lode leroy wrote:
So the missing dll's in question are a build-environment
issue, and not a gimp-compilation issue...
Just make sure you use the correct import libraries.
It is also possible to create them yourself, from the
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:04:42AM -0500, Lance Dockins wrote:
I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make
this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do
so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use in the
professional
On Tuesday, October 4, 2005, 18:11:36, Michael Schumacher wrote:
It is also possible to create them yourself, from the DLL files. The MinGW
docs contain a section about this (using pexports and dlltool, IIRC).
Didn't you write instructions for this in the wiki?
this is so interesting. Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.
you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.
i am very impressed that it was able to make free software expensive,
this is a simply
yeah, i read something that seemed as if it was too expensive to use
free software and a sane build environment. i have been wrong before.
carol
___
Gimp-developer mailing list
Gimp-developer@lists.xcf.berkeley.edu
Hi,
Lance Dockins [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to
make this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware
to do so without destroying the Win32 environment I'm required to use
in the professional world. My guess is
On Tuesday 04 October 2005 09:58 am, Carol Spears wrote:
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 09:04:42AM -0500, Lance Dockins wrote:
I should also clarify that I have considered switching to Linux to make
this easier, but I just don't have the time, money, and hardware to do
so without destroying the
Lance wrote:
* A spare hard drive
* A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
* Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
Just to be a weenie, I'll mention live CDs like Knoppix.
Or even USB-bootable systems. (I got to play with one of those this past
weekend at a friend's workplace.
Hal V. Engel wrote:
If all you need is enough of a Linux installation to get GIMP
to build and to test GIMP then the amount of diskspace needed to do this is
fairly small and you can free up a partition on your existing hard drive(s)
to do this.
Good point. I thought of doing this myself,
Hey folks,
Before you send a message to this list, please give a moment of thought
to whether the entire GIMP development community really needs to read
what you are writing. If not, how about using private email?
Thank you,
-- Bill
__ __ __
On Tuesday 04 October 2005 02:28 pm, Lance Dockins wrote:
Hal V. Engel wrote:
If all you need is enough of a Linux installation to get GIMP
to build and to test GIMP then the amount of diskspace needed to do this
is fairly small and you can free up a partition on your existing hard
On 10/4/05, Lance Dockins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
this is so interesting. Win32 has succeeded in making linux expensive.
you are asking that the Win32 environment not work the way it was
designed to work -- at least i think this is what you are saying.
i am very impressed that it
On 10/4/05, Tor Lillqvist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
lode leroy writes:
The thing is that for compiling gimp from cvs, you need quite some
expertise
in the autotools, libtool, aclocal, pkg-config etc to fix those
not-100%-working-together- distributed binaries...
Would it be feasible
On Tue, Oct 04, 2005 at 08:08:45PM -0400, michael chang wrote:
Just to note, live systems on optical media won't preserve data
between reboots without storing it somewhere, e.g. on a file or
partition (Knoppix does this with some scripts somewhere IIRC). I
don't know about USB systems.
Well,
On Wednesday 05 October 2005 01:50, Lance Dockins wrote:
* Time
* A spare hard drive
* A reliable partition manager (instead of a drive)
* Perhaps an alternate computer entirely
* Potential other hardware for those components that
Linux drivers don't function well
On Tuesday 04 October 2005 16:37, lode leroy wrote:
Would it be feasible to create a big zip-file that contains
everything for gimp for download?
If you call it GIMP-toaster, many people will instantly recognise its
purpose.
Cheers; Leon
--
http://cyberknights.com.au/ Modern tools;
On Wednesday 05 October 2005 03:11, Hal V. Engel wrote:
Windows and
Linux can live on the same machine with no problems. So you do not
have to destroy the Wind32 environment. Many of the folks on this
list, myself included, have both Linux and Windows running on the
machines they use on a
21 matches
Mail list logo