On Monday 24 Feb 03, David Starks-Browning writes:
...
Unfortunately, I just found a possible showstopper with a Cygwin
build. Because Windows is case-insensitive with filenames, gcc finds
plucker/viewer/font.h to satisfy
#include Font.h
instead of Core/System/Font.h from the SDK.
I came across http://sourceforge.net/projects/plucker/ and
http://plucker.sourceforge.net/ but there doesn't seem to be anything
going on there. Is it an intentional placeholder or forgotten or ... ?
That was originally going to be the location for Plucker, until we
realized that
I don't suppose there's a mailing list, like
[EMAIL PROTECTED], that receives log messages for each CVS
commit?
There isn't a mailing list per-se, but I get a copy of every cvs log
message that is sent into the servers, procmailed into a separate folder, so
I can make sure everything
I don't know if any of you have been following the bruhaha
about aggregators downloading whole websites, but I ran
across the following message from Mark Pilgrim today, and
wondered if Plucker wanted to start being a good web-citizen
and honouring robots.txt.
At 10:23 AM 2/25/2003 +, David Starks-Browning wrote:
On Monday 24 Feb 03, David Starks-Browning writes:
...
Unfortunately, I just found a possible showstopper with a Cygwin
build. Because Windows is case-insensitive with filenames, gcc finds
plucker/viewer/font.h to satisfy
Blake Winton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wondered if Plucker wanted to start being a good web-citizen
and honouring robots.txt.
Plucker is not necessarily a robot, although it can operate as one. It
should support robots.txt only when it is recursing into a site, not when
downloading a single
On Tuesday 25 Feb 03, Fringe Ryder writes:
In such an environment, it would be understood that plucker/viewer
shouldn't be in the include path. That's a project file; inclusions of it
would look something like:
#include ../viewer/font.h
while core system files are obviously in
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
I'm not suggesting we move en-masse over to 2.53, but if
we move anywhere off of 2.13, the next jump is 2.53, not 2.52 or
earlier.
Well, if the autoconf requirement is changed I will just have to
change it back locally (I will update my current
On Tuesday 25 Feb 03, Michael Nordström writes:
A month from now, you suddenly decide you want to reorganize the file
structure; while we lousy open-source developers only have to change
a '-I' compiler directive, you professionals will go through all your
source code making these changes
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 04:24:03PM +, David Starks-Browning wrote:
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker
on Windows. Who cares? Despite that oversite, it can be done now,
thanks to Cygwin. (That's why Cygwin exists!) Moreover, it's
entirely possible that
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker on
Windows.
I wouldn't say we've _ignored_ it, just that none of us run Windows.
d.
___
plucker-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 10:49 AM 2/25/2003 -0500, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
It's quite normal to have several inclusions with the same filename but
different locations in a project, and that's often outside of your control
completely.
My issue with this, if I understand the problem correctly, is that
it
At 04:10 PM 2/25/2003 +, Michael Nordström wrote:
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003, Fringe Ryder wrote:
In such an environment, it would be understood that plucker/viewer
shouldn't be in the include path. That's a project file; inclusions of it
would look something like:
#include
On Tuesday 25 Feb 03, Adam McDaniel writes:
A question about your solution to fix cygwin. Is it possible to
include a check for that in the configure script? Maybe first check if
we're using cygwin then check if that environment variable is set.. if
not print an error.. That would atleast be
Your first impression was better; you missed a provided essential detail.
The solution isn't to hardcode the path, just the relative path of the
project tree... which has no need to change.
The term no need to change isn't a good thing to rely on, however.
Anything can happen in the
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker
on Windows. Who cares? Despite that oversite, it can be done now,
thanks to Cygwin. (That's why Cygwin exists!) Moreover, it's
entirely possible that if header-file-naming was the only impediment
to a Cygwin build, then
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003, David Starks-Browning wrote:
One could ask whether the GCC option -Isrcdir/viewer is
appropriate.
There are reasons for why some of these options are included; one
reason is to be able to build the viewer in a different directory
than the source code is located in.
/Mike
At 11:32 AM 2/25/2003 -0500, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker on
Windows.
I wouldn't say we've _ignored_ it, just that none of us run Windows.
Yeah! When I ran across Plucker back in September, the Plucker team was
very
On Tuesday 25 Feb 03, Robert O'Connor writes:
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker
on Windows. Who cares? Despite that oversite, it can be done now,
thanks to Cygwin. (That's why Cygwin exists!) Moreover, it's
entirely possible that if
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003 at 09:22:25AM -0800, Fringe Ryder wrote:
At 11:32 AM 2/25/2003 -0500, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
Indeed, the Plucker Team has ignored the possibility to build plucker on
Windows.
I wouldn't say we've _ignored_ it, just that none of us run
Windows.
At 12:12 PM 2/25/2003 -0500, David A. Desrosiers wrote:
The term no need to change isn't a good thing to rely on, however.
Anything can happen in the source code tree, things can move around, get
deleted, pushed into subdirectories, etc. and if you hard-code the relative
path into the
Your example is certainly compelling. I would hope that such initial
organizations are rare though; I would expect the initial designer who set
it up that way probably screwed up a lot of other things simultaneously.
Projects change, mature, take on other capabilities, and certainly
On Tue, Feb 25, 2003, Fringe Ryder wrote:
I was noting the different standards of the environments, not the
quality of developers.
Nice try, but the fact remains that most of your message was nothing
but an insult against free software developers and that is not the
kind of message you should
---Reply to mail from Michael Nordström about Table Compression
On Mon, Feb 24, 2003, Chris Hawks wrote:
You're more familiar with the uncompress code (and palm databases)
than I, so, how about this plan for uncompressing (possibly nested)
tables??
I have a very pragmatic view; if it works
24 matches
Mail list logo
