Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
Chris; On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 06:45:18PM -0500, Christopher W. Curtis wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9 Jan, Christopher Curtis wrote: I don't see a public rsync server for gimp, cvs or otherwise. Perhaps this might be an acceptable option for people with modest bandwidth capabilities. There are anonymous CVS servers for the GIMP. Yes, yes there are. There are no *rsync* servers though, be they rsync'ing against a .tar, a .tgz, the CVS tree, or an extracted CVS tree. I'll set one up. I keep a fairly up-to-date mirror of anoncvs so I will add a cron job for that and put it up on my ADSL line. I'll get back to folks on this RSN. Cheers, Tom -- Tom Rathborne [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aceldama.com/~tomr/ To be nobody-but-yourself -- in a world which is doing its best night and day, to make you everybody else -- means to fight the hardest battle which any human being can fight; and never stop fighting. -- e.e. cummings
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
On 10 January, 2001 - Raphael Quinet sent me these 2.1K bytes:
Unfortunately, none of the three addresses mentioned for anoncvs
allowed me to get any files. One of them failed because of a server
configuration problem, another one could be reached but did not
respond, and the last one was apparently offline because it could not
be reached at all (no ping).
I admin anoncvs3.gnome.org (130.239.18.151) and it shouldn't have had
any problems, it's been _very_ stable for the last few years.
I hope that the situation is better for the non-anonymous CVS server.
I would be glad if anyone could give me the IP address of an anonymous
GNOME CVS mirror that works reasonably well for European users.
anoncvs3.gnome.org is in Sweden connected to the Swedish University
Network.
/Tomas
--
Tomas gren, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.ing.umu.se/~stric/
|- Student at Computing Science, University of Ume
`- Sysadmin at {cs,ing,acc}.umu.se
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
On 9 Jan, Christopher Curtis wrote: Patchsets also have a big problem which timecop already noticed: They don't contain binary files or patches to such and thus a patched tree might miss quite a few important files after a while. xdelta wouldn't cause that particular problem but is harder to use and deltas are not as obvious to read as an unified diff. I don't think that the majority of people applying patches really care what the format of the patch is (developers, of course, probably do, but not people like timecop or myself who prefer a xxxK patch to a xxMB download). They do; if we started now to switch over to deltas then quite a few people would complain about that. I definitely see the point, I'm behind a very narrow pipe as well so I prefer patches, too, but what is even more comfortable than patches is CVS, because they don't suffer from the problems patches do and are much easier to get and more complicated to mess up the source. I don't see a public rsync server for gimp, cvs or otherwise. Perhaps this might be an acceptable option for people with modest bandwidth capabilities. There are anonymous CVS servers for the GIMP. -- Servus, Daniel
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 9 Jan, Christopher Curtis wrote: They do; if we started now to switch over to deltas then quite a few people would complain about that. I definitely see the point, I'm behind a very narrow pipe as well so I prefer patches, too, but what is even more comfortable than patches is CVS, because they don't suffer from the problems patches do and are much easier to get and more complicated to mess up the source. This is not true for everybody. For example, I usually access the Internet from work and I use a laptop, ZIP, CD-R or floppies to transfer files to my PC at home. A firewall prevents me from accessing anything that does not use FTP, HTTP or SMTP. This means that I can easily download patches and bring them home, but I cannot use CVS. Note that the absence of binary files in the patch files can also be considered as a feature for the weakly-connected users: the patches are much smaller because they do not contain the latest splash screen or brushes that is included in every new version. This saves half a megabyte for every download. I don't see a public rsync server for gimp, cvs or otherwise. Perhaps this might be an acceptable option for people with modest bandwidth capabilities. There are anonymous CVS servers for the GIMP. Two days ago, I installed a new modem on my home PC because I thought that after having spent several years working with semi-obsolete released versions of the source code, I should get the bleeding edge and use CVS from home (no firewall problems). So I tried to get the latest gimp from the anonymous CVS server(s). Unfortunately, none of the three addresses mentioned for anoncvs allowed me to get any files. One of them failed because of a server configuration problem, another one could be reached but did not respond, and the last one was apparently offline because it could not be reached at all (no ping). I hope that the situation is better for the non-anonymous CVS server. I would be glad if anyone could give me the IP address of an anonymous GNOME CVS mirror that works reasonably well for European users. -Raphael
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
Raphael Quinet wrote:
Two days ago, I installed a new modem on my home PC because I thought
that after having spent several years working with semi-obsolete
released versions of the source code, I should get the bleeding edge
and use CVS from home (no firewall problems). So I tried to get the
latest gimp from the anonymous CVS server(s).
Unfortunately, none of the three addresses mentioned for anoncvs
allowed me to get any files.
snipped...
Reproduced from "Re: anonymous CVS is broken :(" thread, Jan-04-2001
Following courtesy of Tomas gren, striccommercial "at" signing.umu.se,
(who wrote...)
On 04 January, 2001 - Nix sent me these 0.5K bytes:
Whoever is providing anonymous CVS, it's broken.
Some of them are, not all.
Name:anoncvs.gnome.org
Addresses: 142.92.65.13, 192.58.206.110, 209.81.8.253, 130.239.18.151
Aliases: anoncvs.gimp.org
There are aliases anoncvs1.gnome.org - anoncvs4.gnome.org as well
1 and 3 (I admin #3) are working, 2 seems to not respond (routing
problems) and 4 has chmod problems. CC:ing the server admins.
As of this writing (Wed Jan 10 20:57:04 EST 2001) here's how the
pings go down from New York City
142.92.65.13PING anonvcs.gnome.org (142.92.65.13): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 142.92.65.13: icmp_seq=0 ttl=241 time=240.624 ms
192.58.206.110 PING asterix.crl.dec.com (192.58.206.110): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 192.58.206.110: icmp_seq=0 ttl=242 time=275.294 ms
209.81.8.253PING cvsonopn.varesearch.com (209.81.8.253): 56 data bytes
36 bytes from e2-1.community8-bi8000.valinux.com (198.186.202.94):
Destination Host Unreachable for icmp_seq=0
130.239.18.151 PING farbror.acc.umu.se (130.239.18.151): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 130.239.18.151: icmp_seq=0 ttl=238 time=425.297 ms
Personally, CVS has made my life easier; no
need to sort out patch sets, and after the
working directory is in place, there are not
so vast amount of deltas that a refresh takes
any longer than 10-15 minutes (36K connection).
Plus, you can diff against earlier versions to
better track on-going code catastrophes ;).
Be good, be well
Garry
--
--
P.S. I'm starting the new century with a new ISP;
so my email address is changing:
gosgood "at" idt.net -- grosgood "at" rcn.com
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Patchsets also have a big problem which timecop already noticed: They don't contain binary files or patches to such and thus a patched tree might miss quite a few important files after a while. xdelta wouldn't cause that particular problem but is harder to use and deltas are not as obvious to read as an unified diff. I don't think that the majority of people applying patches really care what the format of the patch is (developers, of course, probably do, but not people like timecop or myself who prefer a xxxK patch to a xxMB download). I don't see a public rsync server for gimp, cvs or otherwise. Perhaps this might be an acceptable option for people with modest bandwidth capabilities. (Just now catching up with holiday mail...) Chris
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
On 26 Dec, Garry R. Osgood wrote: The tarballs and patch-sets are really meant for end-users who prefer to compile from source, but don't otherwise desire to get involved in maintenance and so don't have a strong motivation to keep a bleeding-edge source tree around. Patch sets are published with this laid-back attitude in mind, They lack the CVS administrative files which is a pity (but then, CVS admin directories don't always transplant themselves effortlessly. They depend on the context of particular users on particular clients using particular CVS servers) Patchsets also have a big problem which timecop already noticed: They don't contain binary files or patches to such and thus a patched tree might miss quite a few important files after a while. xdelta wouldn't cause that particular problem but is harder to use and deltas are not as obvious to read as an unified diff. I also noticed the first problem a while ago and thus I had to refetch the whole tarball every now and then which is a pain over a slow line. Luckily our maintainer is kind enough to provide bzipped tarballs while the GNOME maintainers in general haven't got the clue yet. -- Servus, Daniel
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
Disclaimer: This should really be addressed personally to egger, but after writing this I thought that I should post it for general consumption anyway. If you are easily offended, or if you think that SuSe "rulez", or if you think that you are a "31337 g1mp h4x0r" then you shouldn't read the rest of this message. On Tue, 26 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You are such a whining moron. Why should I solve YOUR homemade problems? Now go think again Hey shithead, all I am asking for is a fucking patch for a piece of shit program that could have been replaced by photoshop 6 long fucking time ago. And I am not even asking you to do it, because obviously you are incapable of helping others. No go back to running your idiot friendly suse distribution and fuck off. I haven't installed gimp 1.2 and I don't plan to until you elitist bastard developers plan to provide me with a patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2.0. And if it doesn't happen then I guess fuck gimp. If you ignorant fuckheads want your shit to suceed you need to worry about USERS not what YOU want to do. My recent postings here about providing for a more consistent *USER* experience with gimp were met with fucking idiotic hostility of "31337 hax0rs g1mp 1z 31337 d0nt fux0r w1th 1t" type attitude, if you want your shit to be used by random web designers who don't know how to recompile their kernel and don't know what version of GTK they have installed on the system, you need to pay attention to shit like this. As long as you think that gimp is your fuck toy, that's going to stay exactly that way, and most people who know what they want will be using photoshop instead. So fuck off and die, and don't litter the mailing list with your retarded postings. *I* have a genuine user concern, that is having to download 10mb of source code instead of a patch, when nothing is stopping *the developers* from providing me with such things. If I was asking for gimp to be integrated into Office 2000, you might think I have a problem. But all I am asking is for something that you shitheads have done for the last year giving patches from previous version to the next, and how the fuck is this any different from providing a patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2.0. Like I said, fuck off and die. tc -- ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・ timecop at japan.co.jp | ＯＡ通信サビース株式会社 | NTT DoCoMo I thought everything that Linus Torvalds is involved with was divine perfection? Must be a problem with NEC and Sony -about Crusoe recall ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
LOL! I'm starting to love this guy :). As an interesting side note, you (tc) may be surprised to know that your 1.1.32-1.2.0 patch was created and hosted on a SuSE 6.4 box (namely my own). Sweet irony :) Lourens [EMAIL PROTECTED] schreef: Disclaimer: This should really be addressed personally to egger, but after writing this I thought that I should post it for general consumption anyway. If you are easily offended, or if you think that SuSe "rulez", or if you think that you are a "31337 g1mp h4x0r" then you shouldn't read the rest of this message. [snip]
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
Go Away -- /--\ /--\ | Tal Danzig [EMAIL PROTECTED] |--| Linux by Libranet| | Homepage:|--| The TOP Desktop | | http://awpti.org/~tal|--| http://www.libranet.com | \--/ \--/
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On Tue, 26 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Huh? Don't get it. My bandwidth (64K) and time are also limited and still CVS is much faster than ftping and patching. And in addition you get the benefit not having to care about patches and well, your patches to the GIMP are also much easier to create with a CVS tree. You know since you take time to answer my posts, I might as well too. Compared to your "limited" 64k how does 9600 that disconnects every 5 minutes sound to you? And the fact that downloading something like a full gimp 1.2.0 would take close to 2 or 3 hours? And the fact that those 2-3 hours would cost me somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 PLUS telephone charges? Now go think again. I connect a few times a day for a few minutes to check email and get patches to latest stuff, and even downloading a 300k patch is bad enough not to bother with anything over 1mb. Thank you for taking your time to read this. And if you still insist on using CVS that would require me to go to www.gimp.org, find out the CVS server info (that would take as much time as downloading the 1.1.32 to 1.2 patch), and hope that whatever state my gimp tarball is in going to be acceptable for CVS, which is unlikely, so I am probably going to end up spending a couple hours trying to get all the little pieces and redialing in between. Try it sometime. And don't tell me about having to care about my patches. I haven't downloaded full source code to anything in the last 6 months. So I should know what to do with them. And yes, there is a possibility that total size of all patches exceeds the size of the current version patched up from the last one. But, it's spread over a long period of time and is not as noticeable. Having to download full ~8mb of gimp every new version would certainly kill my interest. And even linux kernel people provided a patch from 2.3.99 to 2.4.0-test. This is the only reason I am still able to test 2.4.0 because last time I got a full 2.3.xx tree was long time ago. And my gimp tarball IS out of sync with whatever is out there, because somewhere along the way some people decided to or not to include things like gimp_splash.ppm, there are some brushes I think missing from the gimpressionist plugin, and latest 1.1.31 patch was missing a number of .png images from the help dir, etc. But as long as the code patches clean, I really don't care. I don't read help anyway. So someone who has the time to do so just make a patch and stick it in gimp/unstable or whatever. If someone needs it, they will get it. That would include me, also. tc -- ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・ timecop at japan.co.jp | ＯＡ通信サビース株式会社 | NTT DoCoMo I thought everything that Linus Torvalds is involved with was divine perfection? Must be a problem with NEC and Sony -about Crusoe recall ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On 27 Dec, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know since you take time to answer my posts, I might as well too. Compared to your "limited" 64k how does 9600 that disconnects every 5 minutes sound to you? And the fact that downloading something like a full gimp 1.2.0 would take close to 2 or 3 hours? And the fact that those 2-3 hours would cost me somewhere in the neighborhood of $5 PLUS telephone charges? Now go think again. You are such a whining moron. Why should I solve YOUR homemade problems? Now go think again -- Servus, Daniel
Re: gimp patch 1.1.32-1.2.0 [Also: Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I got off my lazy arse and made a patch. I have no idea whether I did things correctly, I just downloaded the gimp- 1.1.32.tar.bz2 and gimp-1.2.0.tar.bz2 files, unpacked them, did diff -u -r gimp-1.1.32 gimp-1.2.0 gimp-patch, then bzip2'd that. It's 534kb, and you can download it from http://nova.student.utwente.nl/tc/gimp-patch-1.1.32- 1.2.0.bz2 Merry Christmas, Lourens Commendable, and in keeping with the spirit of the season. Thank you. Personally, I would strongly urge anyone desiring to support a Gnome or GNU/Linux project to learn about CVS. See http://cvsbook.redbean.com. The tarballs and patch-sets are really meant for end-users who prefer to compile from source, but don't otherwise desire to get involved in maintenance and so don't have a strong motivation to keep a bleeding-edge source tree around. Patch sets are published with this laid-back attitude in mind, They lack the CVS administrative files which is a pity (but then, CVS admin directories don't always transplant themselves effortlessly. They depend on the context of particular users on particular clients using particular CVS servers) After the initial working directory download (which can be painful on a slow, intermittent connection, but not prohibitive -- see below) keeping a working CVS directory current is painless, *especially* if one has a slow or intermittent connection. With CVS update, the server sends patches, not whole files, and per-patch compression somewhat lowers the absolute amount of bits to transfer (Steinar notes this could be better - agreed, but while the compressor could optimize across the entire patch set, it would not be as graceful in recovering if the connection dropped) Should a connection drop, the CVS client and server pickup can pick up where they left off -- check- pointing is an adjunct process to synchronizing a working tree with the repository. In contrast, not all ftp servers support restarting in an analogous way. And as for time, one can set up a cron job to do nightly syncs when one is asleep or otherwise occupied with something else, so it just happens that the tree is updated when you awake or come back to work. (with a little extra cleverness, the job can be written to restart dropped connections). Across the three or four projects I'm interested in, a weekly CVS hookup is generally complete in about fifteen to twenty minutes. (36K modem). Clearly, I could reduce the connect time if I synced nightly (fewer deltas). Apart from that, you have the CVS utilities available to access file update logs, find out who committed what, when and where, and other whatnot (Such information is also avalable from http://cvs.gnome.org/bonsai as well for many gnome projects). Most of all, you are liberated from wondering if a patch set matches a code base, since your CVS working directory and the repository it is associated with have per-file version granularity. See http://www.gimp.org/devel_cvs.html My two U. S. cents Garry
cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
I am not supposed to download 10mb of source code, I have been patching up since like 1.1.20, no way, you can provide a good patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2.0. thanks tc -- ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・ timecop at japan.co.jp | ＯＡ通信サビース株式会社 | NTT DoCoMo I thought everything that Linus Torvalds is involved with was divine perfection? Must be a problem with NEC and Sony -about Crusoe recall ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On 26 Dec, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not supposed to download 10mb of source code, I have been patching up since like 1.1.20, no way, you can provide a good patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2.0. Why not use CVS and tags? Makes life much easier for both sides. -- Servus, Daniel
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On Mon, 25 Dec 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26 Dec, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am not supposed to download 10mb of source code, I have been patching up since like 1.1.20, no way, you can provide a good patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2.0. Why not use CVS and tags? Makes life much easier for both sides. Because a) my bandwidth is limited b) most importantly, my time is limited. Therefore, downloading a 200k patch is a lot easier than getting a cvs-able gimp tree that I can update TODAY. tc -- ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・ timecop at japan.co.jp | ＯＡ通信サビース株式会社 | NTT DoCoMo I thought everything that Linus Torvalds is involved with was divine perfection? Must be a problem with NEC and Sony -about Crusoe recall ・‥…━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━…‥・
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On Tue, Dec 26, 2000 at 04:03:42AM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why not use CVS and tags? Makes life much easier for both sides. Because a) my bandwidth is limited You can use -z9 with cvs, which means the transfer size is not larger than downloadign a normal diff. Therefore, downloading a 200k patch is a lot easier than getting a cvs-able gimp tree that I can update TODAY. Why not generate a patch using rdiff -u or something like that? -- -==- | ==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED] |e| -=/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |
Re: cmon guys, no patch from 1.1.32 to 1.2??
On Mon, Dec 25, 2000 at 10:32:09PM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote: You can use -z9 with cvs, which means the transfer size is not larger than downloadign a normal diff. Doesn't CVS compress each file individually? The CVS protocol is quite inefficient -- normally, I'd just do a CVS update on a shell with good bandwidth, and then either generate a diff, or just rsync the two trees. rsync is your friend ;-) /* Steinar */ -- Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/
