Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread egger

On 30 Jul, Marc Lehmann wrote:

 i would really appreciate if you would finally start thinking, as this
 is not the first time you claim things that are sooo obviously broken
 :(

 No need to get insulting. Spend your time fixing the plugin instead.
 This would be more helpful for you and me. I can supply you all the
 information you'd like to have. 

 BTW: You told me to just close all bugreports reporting gimpperl on
 the bugtracker, but I really think there could be serious problems
 which would need the time of an expert (i.e. you) to have a closer
 look.

-- 

Servus,
   Daniel




Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread egger

On 30 Jul, Marc Lehmann wrote:

 It's you who is unprof(f)essional. You were and are totally wrong with
 your today's claim about gcc -- claiming some not-yet-existant
 version of gcc causes problems on your machine.

 Pardon? Just because a version is not officially released doesn't mean
 it doesn't exist, does it? 

 I'm forced to use a gcc version later than the LAST OFFICIALLY released
 version because I'm having severe problem with the C++ frontend in 
 2.95.2. I claim I'm using the CVS version from today which is obviously
 more rencent than 2.95.2.
 Now please tell me, where's my thinko???
 
 I am not. However, unless you tell me about it I will have no way of
 finding out.

 Ok, I told you that you can't compile the plugin with a CVS version 
 of gcc. There will be surely a new release somewhen so even more
 people will notice it, so fixing it before that will happen seems
 sensible to me.
 
 For example, when I told you that your latest patch uses mempcpy, a
 function not available on most systems, you just replied with a quote
 from the libc info pages(!), claiming the function _does_ exist.

 Sorry Marc, I told you very clearly that this shouldn't have been in
 the patch since it was just a try that has never worked anyway but
 since you told me in a very selfconfident way that this
 function hasn't ever existed I replied with a quote of the info page!

 That's the fact, anything else is pure speculation from your side.

 [ Rest of speculations deleted ]

 Marc, I just want to know ONE little thing: Will you help to make
 the gimpperl plugin usable on more systems (for example on future
 gccs), YES or NO? 

-- 

Servus,
   Daniel




Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread egger

On 30 Jul, Marc Lehmann wrote:

  No need to get insulting.
 
 It's pure fact. You keep claiming all sorts of funny things that you
 yourself should have known long before you started posting about it.

 Ok Marc, it's enough. I will not continue this useless flamewar!
 In real life you sometimes play the nice guy but back on the computer
 you're pretty unproffesional!

 And I think otherwise. Don't ask me if you are going to ignore me.

 I wouldn't answer if I had ignored you. The perl plugin is broken
 on several configurations and you're ignoring it. If you don't want
 to help, let it be and do whatever you like to do. 

 I for my part offered help to remove the problems but am pretty
 clueless since I don't know much about perl, otherwise I'd fix
 it on my own.

-- 

Servus,
   Daniel




Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread Marc Lehmann

On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 04:54:55PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 On 30 Jul, Marc Lehmann wrote:
 
  i would really appreciate if you would finally start thinking, as this
  is not the first time you claim things that are sooo obviously broken
  :(
 
  No need to get insulting.

It's pure fact. You keep claiming all sorts of funny things that you
yourself should have known long before you started posting about it.

 Spend your time fixing the plugin instead.

This also has nothing to do with any plugin. What I said is in no way
limited to this week. It is your general behaviour.

  This would be more helpful for you and me.

It would indeed be most helpful if you try thinking a bit before you
post. I just mean that.

  BTW: You told me to just close all bugreports reporting gimpperl on
  the bugtracker, but I really think there could be serious problems
  which would need the time of an expert (i.e. you) to have a closer

And I think otherwise. Don't ask me if you are going to ignore me.

-- 
  -==- |
  ==-- _   |
  ---==---(_)__  __   __   Marc Lehmann  +--
  --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /   [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
  -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\   XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation   |
 |



Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread Marc Lehmann

On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 06:02:04PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  It's pure fact. You keep claiming all sorts of funny things that you
  yourself should have known long before you started posting about it.
 
  Ok Marc, it's enough. I will not continue this useless flamewar!
  In real life you sometimes play the nice guy but back on the computer
  you're pretty unproffesional!

It's you who is unprof(f)essional. You were and are totally wrong with
your today's claim about gcc -- claiming some not-yet-existant version of
gcc causes problems on your machine.

This is distracting time and other resources from real problems.

  And I think otherwise. Don't ask me if you are going to ignore me.
 
  I wouldn't answer if I had ignored you.

Well, you sound like that ;)

 The perl plugin is broken
  on several configurations and you're ignoring it.

I am not. However, unless you tell me about it I will have no way of
finding out.

  I for my part offered help to remove the problems but am pretty

Then start doing what you say you are offering. Claims about problems with
nonexistant programs is _not_ helping anybody.

And please stop picking on your problems with perl. I am _not_ talking
about perl, but about your general attitude of posting, well, garbage to
this list unrelated to me, but related to gimp and often (fortunately
not always) totally wrong. Wrong in a way that you, yourself, could have
avoided with minmal effort.

For example, when I told you that your latest patch uses mempcpy, a
function not available on most systems, you just replied with a quote from
the libc info pages(!), claiming the function _does_ exist. When I told
you that your usage of mempcpy is wrong anyway (you used it like memcpy)
you told me to read the manpage. Fact is, either you didn't read the
manpage or you simply didn't understand it. Honestly, I suspect it was a
typing error and you just wanted a way to save your face, wether it breaks
gimp or not.

It's your willingness to break the gimp sources without blinking,
and without willing to fix things later, combined with your immense
willingness of stealing other people's time if it saves you looking up a
manpage that cost you my support now, which, I guess was the only person
supporting you anymore.

-- 
  -==- |
  ==-- _   |
  ---==---(_)__  __   __   Marc Lehmann  +--
  --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /   [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
  -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\   XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation   |
 |



Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread Marc Lehmann

On Sun, Jul 30, 2000 at 12:09:25AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  The most frequent bug I'm stumbling over is the uncompilability with
  gcc compilers more rencent than version 2.95.2.  

then you must come from the future. more recent gcc versions than 2.95.2
DO NOT EXIST. it would save us gcc people a lot of time if you could
import, say, gcc-3.0 from the future back to now ;)

i would really appreciate if you would finally start thinking, as this is
not the first time you claim things that are sooo obviously broken :(

-- 
  -==- |
  ==-- _   |
  ---==---(_)__  __   __   Marc Lehmann  +--
  --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /   [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e|
  -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\   XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation   |
 |



Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-30 Thread egger

On 30 Jul, Robert L Krawitz wrote:

 Pardon? Just because a version is not officially released doesn't
 mean it doesn't exist, does it?

 For this purpose, I would say it does (mean that it does not exist).
 Especially since it isn't even a formal snapshot (which egcs was doing
 for a while), but rather just the current development tree.

 Ok, then it's a formalistic problem.
 
 Unless the change has been announced as permanent, you have no idea
 what future gcc's will look like.

 OK, that's a good point. Seems like we'll be talking about this issue
 again when the release the next version 
 Just for reference: GIMP and all other plugins work fine with most
 "versions" I've used so far...

-- 

Servus,
   Daniel




Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-29 Thread egger

On 30 Jul, Andrew J Fortune wrote:

 I currently have the latest developers' version of GIMP (v1.1.24). Can
 someone tell me if Perl scripting is still available ? (...there used
 to be any entry called "Perl-FU" on the Xtns menu).

 Perl normally should be there. But since the Perl plugin has never
 really worked (greetings Marc! :) it's not a big phenomenon that 
 it doesn't work for you... Maybe the compiler gave up at the 
 try to compile the plugin. 

 If you tried to build it on your own, please have a look at the
 problem and then tell us some details. Otherwise just email the
 producer of your package for some explaination...

-- 

Servus,
   Daniel




Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-29 Thread Sven Neumann

Hi,

  Perl normally should be there. But since the Perl plugin has never
  really worked (greetings Marc! :) it's not a big phenomenon that 
  it doesn't work for you... 

Sorry Daniel, but don't we don't need that kind of FUD here. If gimp-perl
is still not working for you, please let us know exactly what kind of 
problems you experience with it. I have the expression that gimp-perl works 
quite good on most installations.


Salut, Sven





Re: Perl Scripting

2000-07-29 Thread Andrew J Fortune

Hi Daniel,

I didn't say that the Perl scripting tool didn't work for me. I said that I
couldn't find it on GIMP's menus.

regards,
Andrew

- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2000 1:52 AM
Subject: Re: Perl Scripting


 On 30 Jul, Andrew J Fortune wrote:

  I currently have the latest developers' version of GIMP (v1.1.24). Can
  someone tell me if Perl scripting is still available ? (...there used
  to be any entry called "Perl-FU" on the Xtns menu).

  Perl normally should be there. But since the Perl plugin has never
  really worked (greetings Marc! :) it's not a big phenomenon that
  it doesn't work for you... Maybe the compiler gave up at the
  try to compile the plugin.

  If you tried to build it on your own, please have a look at the
  problem and then tell us some details. Otherwise just email the
  producer of your package for some explaination...

 --

 Servus,
Daniel