Re: Help with Bug #19550: Add support for symlinks to standalone builder

[Brian Milby via use-livecode]

Found something very interesting and I think it may be a bug (at least an
anomaly)...

if you rename a symbolic link to a folder, the folder that is pointed to is
renamed vice the link

consider the following (-> denotes a symbolic link)
~/tmp/
~/tmp2 -> ./tmp/

rename "~/tmp2" "~/tmp3"

results in

~/tmp2 -> (broken link, still points to ./tmp/ which does not exist)
~/tmp3/

I checked on MacOS and Linux.
The call causing this problem is in "revRedirectMacOSResourcesRecurse"

This particular issue won't impact ".bundle", ".app", nor ".framework"
folders since they are not relocated.
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Help with Bug #19550: Add support for symlinks to standalone builder

[Brian Milby via use-livecode]

Finally working on the actual code in the IDE and discovered that there is
a failure in a different spot than I thought.  "there is a file" returns
false on symbolic links.  So my initial solution is going to need some more
work.

Also, file copy failures are not propagated up the call chain.  First issue
is that the __revSBCopyFile handler just "returns" tResult instead of using
"for error".  But it doesn't really matter since when you go up a couple
levels, it isn't passed further.

And lastly, there is a "move" that takes place somewhere else that is
causing an issue.  I've got the initial copy working, but when this next
step happens it messes up folder symbolic links (files links remain).  This
is on the Mac... I have not testing in Linux yet (not to mention figuring
out the Windows side).  Not sure why it copies to /Contents/MacOS and then
moves it to /Contents/Resources/_MacOS.  I'm just testing with a folder
that I put in the "copy files" section of the builder.

I should be able to sort it out, but will take a little longer than I
thought.

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 10:59 AM, Trevor DeVore via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Brian,
>
> I can definitely test it out. I wouldn’t worry about symbolic links outside
> the folder right now. I don’t believe it affects .frameworks.
>
> --
> Trevor DeVore
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 10:24 AM Brian Milby via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> > Doing a little digging on this.
> >
> > I'm pretty sure this impacts iOS in the same was as MacOS.
> >
> > private command __revSBCopyFolder
> > User and group is copied if MacOS, but not Linux
> >
> > private command __revSBCopyFile
> > Probably good that links are handled as files, because they technically
> > are.
> >
> > Prior to line 351 (probably 348), some code will be needed to determine
> if
> > we are currently dealing with a symbolic link.  On Linux, aliasReference
> > seems to work properly where on MacOS it only works for an actual alias
> > (returns empty for a symbolic link).  On MacOS, I'm seeing the type is
> > actually "rhapslnk" for symbolic links and "MACSalis" for an alias (if
> > others can confirm, I can use my code below).  Not sure about Windows.
> So
> > something like this:
> >
> > put (the platform is "macos" and (tFileType is "rhapslnk" or tFileType is
> > "MACSalis") \
> > or (the platform is "linux" and aliasReference(pSourceFile) is not
> > pSourceFile) into tFileIsLink
> > -- this does count on pSourceFile being an absolute link
> >
> > I think that the problem is that LC is attempting to copy links like it
> > would a binary file which is what is causing the issue.  Lines 351-396
> need
> > to be wrapped in another if statement that properly handles symbolic
> links.
> >
> > if tFileIsLink then
> >-- handle link
> > else
> >-- existing code from 351-396
> > end if
> >
> > The easy way would be to just copy the symbolic link directly without
> > validation.  For relative symbolic links within the copied folder
> > structure, this should be fine.  If the symbolic links point outside of
> the
> > copied structure (i.e. they are absolute to somewhere else in the file
> > system), then there could be an issue with the distributed app.  The
> > problem is that at the point of the copy, you don't have the full path of
> > the destination application (just the file itself), so we can't check and
> > be sure that the link points inside the app (unless pSettings is an array
> > that has that info).  We could check to be sure it is on the same volume
> > fairly easily.  I think it would be good to just flag it as a warning
> > instead of an error that halts the build, but would need to dig a bit to
> > see if/how that is possible.
> >
> > @Mike
> > I don't think the links should be traversed at all, but maintained in the
> > destination app.
> >
> > @Trevor
> > If I put together an updated file, could you test to see if my solution
> > works for you?  I just need to make sure I'm copying the link correctly
> and
> > also figure out what to do on Windows.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Brian
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode <
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> > > A couple of thoughts:
> > > 1) There might be cases where symlinks should not be traversed, so
> there
> > > probably should be an option to traverse or not
> > > 2) There are probably going to be cases where the symlinks are
> recursive.
> > > I think there should definitely be an option to resolve those.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:58 AM Trevor DeVore via use-livecode <
> > > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi everyone,
> > > >
> > > > I’m writing this email to see if there is someone who can pitch in
> and
> > > > implement a fix for bug 19550 [1]. The issue is that the the copy
> > folder
> > > > command that the LC standalone builder uses does not support
> symlinks.
> > > > While this hasn’t 

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[panagiotis merakos via use-livecode]

What Jacque said;

Originally you had built the standalone with LC 9.0.1 rc1 (and installed it
in the device), so its manifest had targetSDKversion=26.
Then you built a new one with LC 9.0.0, so it had its targetSDKversion
equal to the minSDKversion, as specified in the standalone settings, and
probably lower than 26.

Android does not allow you to push an "update" of an app to the device,
that has a lower targetSDKversion than the original installed app.

So the problem was resolved once you deleted the old app.

Panos
--

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 9:21 PM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> It could be because 9.0.1 sets the target version in the manifest to 26
> and 9.0 sets it to the same version as the one you select in the dropdown
> menu in standalone settings. If you've truly removed the old app completely
> I wouldn't think it would matter, but apparently Android stores some record
> of previous installations.
>
> Move the manifest from 9.0.1 into the 9.0 runtime folder temporarily and
> see if that helps.
>
> On 7/21/18 1:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:
>
>> So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed
>> that we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone
>> in 9.0.0, and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the
>> package appears to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as
>> Jacque suggested in a related thread (https://forums.livecode.com/v
>> iewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that did not solve the problem.   Is there
>> something I need to do to the stack to revert back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?
>>
>> FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings,
>> uninstall the old app on the phone, etc.
>>
>> At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.
>>
>> -Dan
>>
>
>
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
> HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
>
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[J. Landman Gay via use-livecode]

It could be because 9.0.1 sets the target version in the manifest to 26 
and 9.0 sets it to the same version as the one you select in the 
dropdown menu in standalone settings. If you've truly removed the old 
app completely I wouldn't think it would matter, but apparently Android 
stores some record of previous installations.


Move the manifest from 9.0.1 into the 9.0 runtime folder temporarily and 
see if that helps.


On 7/21/18 1:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:

So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed that 
we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone in 9.0.0, 
and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the package appears 
to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as Jacque suggested in a 
related thread (https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that 
did not solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to 
revert back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?

FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings, uninstall 
the old app on the phone, etc.

At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.

-Dan



--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | jac...@hyperactivesw.com
HyperActive Software   | http://www.hyperactivesw.com


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[panagiotis merakos via use-livecode]

Ok nice, I know what happened. I will post a detailed msg in a while as I
am not in a computer now.

Best,
Panos

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 21:05 Dan Friedman  wrote:

> Odd… I uninstalled the app from the Android phone and re-installed it.
>  Now it installed.   Go figure.
>
> -Dan
>
>
> On 7/21/18, 12:53 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of panagiotis merakos via
> use-livecode"  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> Can you try setting the app identifier in the standalone settings to
> something unique that definitely is not already installed in the
> device? Is
> it possible that you have installed an app with the same identifier
> (com.yourcompany.yourapp) in the device, which was built with 9.0.1
> rc1?
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:45 panagiotis merakos 
> wrote:
>
> > Hello Dan,
> >
> > What is the version of Android the device is running? I am wondering
> if
> > you get this error because of the value of the targetSdkVersion set
> in the
> > manifest.
> >
> > Best,
> > Panos
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:32 Ray via use-livecode <
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Are you having this problem only on other users' Macs?  If so then
> >> you've run into the same Apple induced problem I posted about a
> month
> >> ago.  It only happens when you distribute to others using MacOS
> 10.12 or
> >> higher.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/21/2018 2:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:
> >> > So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty
> pissed
> >> that we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as
> standalone
> >> in 9.0.0, and try to install it on a device, the device reports
> that “the
> >> package appears to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number
> (as
> >> Jacque suggested in a related thread (
> >> https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that did
> not
> >> solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack
> to revert
> >> back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?
> >> >
> >> > FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone
> settings,
> >> uninstall the old app on the phone, etc.
> >> >
> >> > At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.
> >> >
> >> > -Dan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via
> >> use-livecode"  >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >  Monte,
> >> >
> >> >  Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to
> 9.0.0?
> >> Or is there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?
> >> >
> >> >  -Dan
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >  On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte
> Goulding via
> >> use-livecode"  >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >  Hi Dan
> >> >
> >> >  A little update.
> >> >
> >> >  The bug report is here:
> >> >  https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 <
> >> https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434>
> >> >
> >> >  The PR for the fix is here:
> >> >  https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 <
> >> https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610>
> >> >
> >> >  Cheers
> >> >
> >> >  Monte
> >> >
> >> >  > On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via
> use-livecode <
> >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Hi Dan
> >> >  >
> >> >  > This looks like a regression from the large number of
> >> acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am
> >> looking into it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Cheers
> >> >  >
> >> >  > Monte
> >> >  >
> >> >  >> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via
> use-livecode <
> >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> Hello!
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have
> >> acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> lock screen for visual effect
> >> >  >> //do something
> >> >  >> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any
> effect
> >> fails
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual
> effect
> >> is applied.
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> Any thoughts?
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> -Dan
> >> >  >>
> >> >  >> ___
> >> >  >> use-livecode mailing list
> >> >  >> 

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[Dan Friedman via use-livecode]

Odd… I uninstalled the app from the Android phone and re-installed it.   Now it 
installed.   Go figure.

-Dan


On 7/21/18, 12:53 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of panagiotis merakos via 
use-livecode"  wrote:

Can you try setting the app identifier in the standalone settings to
something unique that definitely is not already installed in the device? Is
it possible that you have installed an app with the same identifier
(com.yourcompany.yourapp) in the device, which was built with 9.0.1 rc1?

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:45 panagiotis merakos  wrote:

> Hello Dan,
>
> What is the version of Android the device is running? I am wondering if
> you get this error because of the value of the targetSdkVersion set in the
> manifest.
>
> Best,
> Panos
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:32 Ray via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you having this problem only on other users' Macs?  If so then
>> you've run into the same Apple induced problem I posted about a month
>> ago.  It only happens when you distribute to others using MacOS 10.12 or
>> higher.
>>
>>
>> On 7/21/2018 2:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:
>> > So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed
>> that we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone
>> in 9.0.0, and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the
>> package appears to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as
>> Jacque suggested in a related thread (
>> https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that did not
>> solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to 
revert
>> back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?
>> >
>> > FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings,
>> uninstall the old app on the phone, etc.
>> >
>> > At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.
>> >
>> > -Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via
>> use-livecode" > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >  Monte,
>> >
>> >  Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to 9.0.0?
>> Or is there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?
>> >
>> >  -Dan
>> >
>> >
>> >  On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding via
>> use-livecode" > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >  Hi Dan
>> >
>> >  A little update.
>> >
>> >  The bug report is here:
>> >  https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 <
>> https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434>
>> >
>> >  The PR for the fix is here:
>> >  https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 <
>> https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610>
>> >
>> >  Cheers
>> >
>> >  Monte
>> >
>> >  > On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode 
<
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >  >
>> >  > Hi Dan
>> >  >
>> >  > This looks like a regression from the large number of
>> acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am
>> looking into it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
>> >  >
>> >  > Cheers
>> >  >
>> >  > Monte
>> >  >
>> >  >> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Hello!
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have
>> acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
>> >  >>
>> >  >> lock screen for visual effect
>> >  >> //do something
>> >  >> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any effect
>> fails
>> >  >>
>> >  >> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual effect
>> is applied.
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Any thoughts?
>> >  >>
>> >  >>
>> >  >> -Dan
>> >  >>
>> >  >> ___
>> >  >> use-livecode mailing list
>> >  >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
>> your subscription preferences:
>> >  >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  > ___
>> >  > use-livecode mailing list
>> >  > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  > Please visit this url to subscribe, 

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[panagiotis merakos via use-livecode]

Can you try setting the app identifier in the standalone settings to
something unique that definitely is not already installed in the device? Is
it possible that you have installed an app with the same identifier
(com.yourcompany.yourapp) in the device, which was built with 9.0.1 rc1?

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:45 panagiotis merakos  wrote:

> Hello Dan,
>
> What is the version of Android the device is running? I am wondering if
> you get this error because of the value of the targetSdkVersion set in the
> manifest.
>
> Best,
> Panos
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:32 Ray via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
>> Are you having this problem only on other users' Macs?  If so then
>> you've run into the same Apple induced problem I posted about a month
>> ago.  It only happens when you distribute to others using MacOS 10.12 or
>> higher.
>>
>>
>> On 7/21/2018 2:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:
>> > So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed
>> that we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone
>> in 9.0.0, and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the
>> package appears to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as
>> Jacque suggested in a related thread (
>> https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that did not
>> solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to revert
>> back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?
>> >
>> > FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings,
>> uninstall the old app on the phone, etc.
>> >
>> > At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.
>> >
>> > -Dan
>> >
>> >
>> > On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via
>> use-livecode" > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >  Monte,
>> >
>> >  Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to 9.0.0?
>> Or is there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?
>> >
>> >  -Dan
>> >
>> >
>> >  On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding via
>> use-livecode" > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >  Hi Dan
>> >
>> >  A little update.
>> >
>> >  The bug report is here:
>> >  https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 <
>> https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434>
>> >
>> >  The PR for the fix is here:
>> >  https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 <
>> https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610>
>> >
>> >  Cheers
>> >
>> >  Monte
>> >
>> >  > On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >  >
>> >  > Hi Dan
>> >  >
>> >  > This looks like a regression from the large number of
>> acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am
>> looking into it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
>> >  >
>> >  > Cheers
>> >  >
>> >  > Monte
>> >  >
>> >  >> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via use-livecode <
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Hello!
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have
>> acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
>> >  >>
>> >  >> lock screen for visual effect
>> >  >> //do something
>> >  >> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any effect
>> fails
>> >  >>
>> >  >> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual effect
>> is applied.
>> >  >>
>> >  >> Any thoughts?
>> >  >>
>> >  >>
>> >  >> -Dan
>> >  >>
>> >  >> ___
>> >  >> use-livecode mailing list
>> >  >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
>> your subscription preferences:
>> >  >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> >  >
>> >  >
>> >  > ___
>> >  > use-livecode mailing list
>> >  > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
>> your subscription preferences:
>> >  > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> >
>> >  ___
>> >  use-livecode mailing list
>> >  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
>> your subscription preferences:
>> >  http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>> >
>> >
>> >  ___
>> >  use-livecode mailing list
>> >  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> >  Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription 

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[panagiotis merakos via use-livecode]

Hello Dan,

What is the version of Android the device is running? I am wondering if you
get this error because of the value of the targetSdkVersion set in the
manifest.

Best,
Panos

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018, 20:32 Ray via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Are you having this problem only on other users' Macs?  If so then
> you've run into the same Apple induced problem I posted about a month
> ago.  It only happens when you distribute to others using MacOS 10.12 or
> higher.
>
>
> On 7/21/2018 2:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:
> > So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed
> that we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone
> in 9.0.0, and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the
> package appears to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as
> Jacque suggested in a related thread (
> https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that did not
> solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to revert
> back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?
> >
> > FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings,
> uninstall the old app on the phone, etc.
> >
> > At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.
> >
> > -Dan
> >
> >
> > On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via
> use-livecode"  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Monte,
> >
> >  Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to 9.0.0?
> Or is there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?
> >
> >  -Dan
> >
> >
> >  On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding via
> use-livecode"  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> >  Hi Dan
> >
> >  A little update.
> >
> >  The bug report is here:
> >  https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 <
> https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434>
> >
> >  The PR for the fix is here:
> >  https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 <
> https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610>
> >
> >  Cheers
> >
> >  Monte
> >
> >  > On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >  >
> >  > Hi Dan
> >  >
> >  > This looks like a regression from the large number of
> acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am
> looking into it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
> >  >
> >  > Cheers
> >  >
> >  > Monte
> >  >
> >  >> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >  >>
> >  >> Hello!
> >  >>
> >  >> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have
> acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
> >  >>
> >  >> lock screen for visual effect
> >  >> //do something
> >  >> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any effect fails
> >  >>
> >  >> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual effect
> is applied.
> >  >>
> >  >> Any thoughts?
> >  >>
> >  >>
> >  >> -Dan
> >  >>
> >  >> ___
> >  >> use-livecode mailing list
> >  >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >  >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
> your subscription preferences:
> >  >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >  >
> >  >
> >  > ___
> >  > use-livecode mailing list
> >  > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >  > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage
> your subscription preferences:
> >  > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >
> >  ___
> >  use-livecode mailing list
> >  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >  Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> >  http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >
> >
> >  ___
> >  use-livecode mailing list
> >  use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> >  Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> >  http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> >
> > ___
> > use-livecode mailing list
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this 

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[Ray via use-livecode]

Are you having this problem only on other users' Macs?  If so then 
you've run into the same Apple induced problem I posted about a month 
ago.  It only happens when you distribute to others using MacOS 10.12 or 
higher.



On 7/21/2018 2:29 PM, Dan Friedman via use-livecode wrote:

So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed that 
we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone in 9.0.0, 
and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the package appears 
to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as Jacque suggested in a 
related thread (https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that 
did not solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to 
revert back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?

FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings, uninstall 
the old app on the phone, etc.

At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.

-Dan
  


On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via use-livecode" 
 wrote:

 Monte,
 
 Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to 9.0.0?  Or is there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?
 
 -Dan
 
 
 On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding via use-livecode"  wrote:
 
 Hi Dan
 
 A little update.
 
 The bug report is here:

 https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 

 
 The PR for the fix is here:

 https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 

 
 Cheers
 
 Monte
 
 > On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode  wrote:

 >
 > Hi Dan
 >
 > This looks like a regression from the large number of 
acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am looking into 
it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
 >
 > Cheers
 >
 > Monte
 >
 >> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via use-livecode 
 wrote:
 >>
 >> Hello!
 >>
 >> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have 
acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
 >>
 >> lock screen for visual effect
 >> //do something
 >> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any effect fails
 >>
 >> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual effect is 
applied.
 >>
 >> Any thoughts?
 >>
 >>
 >> -Dan
 >>
 >> ___
 >> use-livecode mailing list
 >> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 >> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
 >> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 >
 >
 > ___
 > use-livecode mailing list
 > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
 > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 
 ___

 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
 
 
 ___

 use-livecode mailing list
 use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
 Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
 http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode



___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Android, acceleratedRendering and visual effect

[Dan Friedman via use-livecode]

So, I tried to revert back to 9.0.0 because my client is pretty pissed that 
we’ve missed our deadline.  Unfortunately, when I save as standalone in 9.0.0, 
and try to install it on a device, the device reports that “the package appears 
to be corrupt”.  I tried changing the build number (as Jacque suggested in a 
related thread (https://forums.livecode.com/viewtopic.php?t=29624)), but that 
did not solve the problem.   Is there something I need to do to the stack to 
revert back to 9.0.0 from 9.0.1?  

FYI, I did all the obvious things like reset the standalone settings, uninstall 
the old app on the phone, etc.

At this point, I would be grateful for ANY advice.

-Dan
 

On 7/20/18, 6:27 AM, "use-livecode on behalf of Dan Friedman via use-livecode" 
 wrote:

Monte,

Thanks!   I have a client waiting… should I revert back to 9.0.0?  Or is 
there a 9.0.1 rc2 coming SOON?

-Dan


On 7/19/18, 5:17 PM, "use-livecode on behalf of Monte Goulding via 
use-livecode"  wrote:

Hi Dan

A little update. 

The bug report is here: 
https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=21434 


The PR for the fix is here:
https://github.com/livecode/livecode/pull/6610 


Cheers

Monte

> On 20 Jul 2018, at 9:54 am, Monte Goulding via use-livecode 
 wrote:
> 
> Hi Dan
> 
> This looks like a regression from the large number of 
acceleratedRendering related patches that went into 9.0.1 rc 1. I am looking 
into it as it will be a blocker for 9.0.1-rc-2.
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Monte
> 
>> On 20 Jul 2018, at 4:13 am, Dan Friedman via use-livecode 
 wrote:
>> 
>> Hello!
>> 
>> Using LC 9.0.1 (rc1), on android only, if I have 
acceleratedRendering on, the effect is not applied when doing this:
>> 
>> lock screen for visual effect
>> //do something
>> unlock screen with visual effect wipe left //any effect fails
>> 
>> However, if acceleratedRendering is off, the visual effect is 
applied.
>> 
>> Any thoughts?
>> 
>> 
>> -Dan
>> 
>> ___
>> use-livecode mailing list
>> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
>> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
> 
> 
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Help with Bug #19550: Add support for symlinks to standalone builder

[Trevor DeVore via use-livecode]

Brian,

I can definitely test it out. I wouldn’t worry about symbolic links outside
the folder right now. I don’t believe it affects .frameworks.

-- 
Trevor DeVore

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 10:24 AM Brian Milby via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Doing a little digging on this.
>
> I'm pretty sure this impacts iOS in the same was as MacOS.
>
> private command __revSBCopyFolder
> User and group is copied if MacOS, but not Linux
>
> private command __revSBCopyFile
> Probably good that links are handled as files, because they technically
> are.
>
> Prior to line 351 (probably 348), some code will be needed to determine if
> we are currently dealing with a symbolic link.  On Linux, aliasReference
> seems to work properly where on MacOS it only works for an actual alias
> (returns empty for a symbolic link).  On MacOS, I'm seeing the type is
> actually "rhapslnk" for symbolic links and "MACSalis" for an alias (if
> others can confirm, I can use my code below).  Not sure about Windows.  So
> something like this:
>
> put (the platform is "macos" and (tFileType is "rhapslnk" or tFileType is
> "MACSalis") \
> or (the platform is "linux" and aliasReference(pSourceFile) is not
> pSourceFile) into tFileIsLink
> -- this does count on pSourceFile being an absolute link
>
> I think that the problem is that LC is attempting to copy links like it
> would a binary file which is what is causing the issue.  Lines 351-396 need
> to be wrapped in another if statement that properly handles symbolic links.
>
> if tFileIsLink then
>-- handle link
> else
>-- existing code from 351-396
> end if
>
> The easy way would be to just copy the symbolic link directly without
> validation.  For relative symbolic links within the copied folder
> structure, this should be fine.  If the symbolic links point outside of the
> copied structure (i.e. they are absolute to somewhere else in the file
> system), then there could be an issue with the distributed app.  The
> problem is that at the point of the copy, you don't have the full path of
> the destination application (just the file itself), so we can't check and
> be sure that the link points inside the app (unless pSettings is an array
> that has that info).  We could check to be sure it is on the same volume
> fairly easily.  I think it would be good to just flag it as a warning
> instead of an error that halts the build, but would need to dig a bit to
> see if/how that is possible.
>
> @Mike
> I don't think the links should be traversed at all, but maintained in the
> destination app.
>
> @Trevor
> If I put together an updated file, could you test to see if my solution
> works for you?  I just need to make sure I'm copying the link correctly and
> also figure out what to do on Windows.
>
> Thanks,
> Brian
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> > A couple of thoughts:
> > 1) There might be cases where symlinks should not be traversed, so there
> > probably should be an option to traverse or not
> > 2) There are probably going to be cases where the symlinks are recursive.
> > I think there should definitely be an option to resolve those.
> >
> > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:58 AM Trevor DeVore via use-livecode <
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi everyone,
> > >
> > > I’m writing this email to see if there is someone who can pitch in and
> > > implement a fix for bug 19550 [1]. The issue is that the the copy
> folder
> > > command that the LC standalone builder uses does not support symlinks.
> > > While this hasn’t been a significant problem in the past, it has now
> > become
> > > one because LiveCode Builder (LCB) code can link to .frameworks on
> macOS
> > > using the Foreign Function Interface (FFI) feature in LiveCode 9.
> > >
> > > As an example, I’ve been working on an LCB wrapper around Sparkle [2]
> and
> > > on another around MASShortcut [3]. In both cases the .framework needs
> to
> > be
> > > distributed with the LCB library. The Standalone Builder does not
> create
> > a
> > > proper copy of the .framework and the code will fail in a standalone.
> > >
> > > Here is a link to the source code on GitHub that needs to be updated:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> https://github.com/livecode/livecode/blob/e6955bb9dc517ba4c5c2da422deb5e
> > 16627ebf1f/ide-support/revsblibrary.livecodescript#L215
> > >
> > > If someone is able to step in and modify the existing code to support
> > > symlinks then others would be able to start distributing extensions
> that
> > > use .frameworks on macOS. I haven’t verified whether or not this
> affects
> > > iOS but it may.
> > >
> > > [1] https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=19550
> > > [2] https://github.com/trevordevore/lc-sparkle
> > > [3] https://github.com/trevordevore/lc-masshortcut
> > >
> > > --
> > > Trevor DeVore
> > > ScreenSteps
> > > www.screensteps.com
> > > ___
> > > 

Re: Help with Bug #19550: Add support for symlinks to standalone builder

[Mark Wieder via use-livecode]

Brian-

Here's the code I use in PowerTools to determine in a cross-platform way 
whether a filespec is a file or a folder. The Windows code is pretty 
stupid, just looking at the file extension, but I couldn't think of a 
better way to figure it out. HTH.


/**
* 
* IsFolder
*
* Determine whether the given filespec is a folder (true) or a file (false)
* @pFileSpec : path reference to a folder or file
* 
*/
private function isFolder pFileSpec
   local tIsFolder
   local tFile, tFiles
   local tTarget
   local tData
   local tAlias
   local tDefaultFolder

   put false into tIsFolder
   if there is a folder pFileSpec then
  -- see if it's an LC8 extension
  put FilesOfFolder(pFileSpec) into tFiles
  filter tFiles with "*.lcm"
  if tFiles is empty then
 -- not an extension, it's a real folder
 put true into tIsFolder
  end if
   else
  -- must be a file reference
  put aliasreference(pFileSpec) into tAlias
  switch the platform
 case "Win32"
-- aliasreference returns empty on OSX, filespec on linux
if tAlias is not empty and tAlias is not pFileSpec then
   if IsFolder(tAlias) then
  put true into tIsFolder
   else
  put false into tIsFolder
   end if
end if
break
 case "MacOS"
-- ignore Windows link files
if char -4 to -1 of pFileSpec is ".lnk" then
   put false into tIsFolder
end if
break
 case "linux"
-- ignore Windows link files
if char -4 to -1 of pFileSpec is ".lnk" then
   put false into tIsFolder
else
   put shell("ls -l" && quote & pFileSpec & quote) into tFile
   if char 1 of tFile is "l" then
  set the itemdelimiter to ">"
  put item -1 of tFile into tTarget
  if the number of lines in tTarget > 1 then
 put true into tIsFolder
  end if
   end if
end if
  end switch
   end if
   return tIsFolder
end isFolder

--
 Mark Wieder
 ahsoftw...@gmail.com

___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Help with Bug #19550: Add support for symlinks to standalone builder

[Brian Milby via use-livecode]

Doing a little digging on this.

I'm pretty sure this impacts iOS in the same was as MacOS.

private command __revSBCopyFolder
User and group is copied if MacOS, but not Linux

private command __revSBCopyFile
Probably good that links are handled as files, because they technically are.

Prior to line 351 (probably 348), some code will be needed to determine if
we are currently dealing with a symbolic link.  On Linux, aliasReference
seems to work properly where on MacOS it only works for an actual alias
(returns empty for a symbolic link).  On MacOS, I'm seeing the type is
actually "rhapslnk" for symbolic links and "MACSalis" for an alias (if
others can confirm, I can use my code below).  Not sure about Windows.  So
something like this:

put (the platform is "macos" and (tFileType is "rhapslnk" or tFileType is
"MACSalis") \
or (the platform is "linux" and aliasReference(pSourceFile) is not
pSourceFile) into tFileIsLink
-- this does count on pSourceFile being an absolute link

I think that the problem is that LC is attempting to copy links like it
would a binary file which is what is causing the issue.  Lines 351-396 need
to be wrapped in another if statement that properly handles symbolic links.

if tFileIsLink then
   -- handle link
else
   -- existing code from 351-396
end if

The easy way would be to just copy the symbolic link directly without
validation.  For relative symbolic links within the copied folder
structure, this should be fine.  If the symbolic links point outside of the
copied structure (i.e. they are absolute to somewhere else in the file
system), then there could be an issue with the distributed app.  The
problem is that at the point of the copy, you don't have the full path of
the destination application (just the file itself), so we can't check and
be sure that the link points inside the app (unless pSettings is an array
that has that info).  We could check to be sure it is on the same volume
fairly easily.  I think it would be good to just flag it as a warning
instead of an error that halts the build, but would need to dig a bit to
see if/how that is possible.

@Mike
I don't think the links should be traversed at all, but maintained in the
destination app.

@Trevor
If I put together an updated file, could you test to see if my solution
works for you?  I just need to make sure I'm copying the link correctly and
also figure out what to do on Windows.

Thanks,
Brian


On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:41 AM, Mike Kerner via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> A couple of thoughts:
> 1) There might be cases where symlinks should not be traversed, so there
> probably should be an option to traverse or not
> 2) There are probably going to be cases where the symlinks are recursive.
> I think there should definitely be an option to resolve those.
>
> On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:58 AM Trevor DeVore via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I’m writing this email to see if there is someone who can pitch in and
> > implement a fix for bug 19550 [1]. The issue is that the the copy folder
> > command that the LC standalone builder uses does not support symlinks.
> > While this hasn’t been a significant problem in the past, it has now
> become
> > one because LiveCode Builder (LCB) code can link to .frameworks on macOS
> > using the Foreign Function Interface (FFI) feature in LiveCode 9.
> >
> > As an example, I’ve been working on an LCB wrapper around Sparkle [2] and
> > on another around MASShortcut [3]. In both cases the .framework needs to
> be
> > distributed with the LCB library. The Standalone Builder does not create
> a
> > proper copy of the .framework and the code will fail in a standalone.
> >
> > Here is a link to the source code on GitHub that needs to be updated:
> >
> >
> > https://github.com/livecode/livecode/blob/e6955bb9dc517ba4c5c2da422deb5e
> 16627ebf1f/ide-support/revsblibrary.livecodescript#L215
> >
> > If someone is able to step in and modify the existing code to support
> > symlinks then others would be able to start distributing extensions that
> > use .frameworks on macOS. I haven’t verified whether or not this affects
> > iOS but it may.
> >
> > [1] https://quality.livecode.com/show_bug.cgi?id=19550
> > [2] https://github.com/trevordevore/lc-sparkle
> > [3] https://github.com/trevordevore/lc-masshortcut
> >
> > --
> > Trevor DeVore
> > ScreenSteps
> > www.screensteps.com
> > ___
> > use-livecode mailing list
> > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> > subscription preferences:
> > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
>
>
> --
> On the first day, God created the heavens and the Earth
> On the second day, God created the oceans.
> On the third day, God put the animals on hold for a few hours,
>and did a little diving.
> And God said, "This is good."
> 

Re: adding a Shared (Background) Group after the fact

[Tom Glod via use-livecode]

thank you gentlemen!

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 9:37 AM, Klaus major-k via use-livecode <
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote:

> Hi Tom,
>
> > Am 21.07.2018 um 15:31 schrieb Tom Glod via use-livecode <
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com>:
> >
> > Hi Folks, I failed to think my stack through ahead of time and forgot to
> > add a shared group to my first card before I made the other cards.
> >
> > Is there a way to do that afterwards? and have a new group shared on all
> > the cards?
> >
> > Copying a shared group to existing cards doesn't seem to create an
> > instance.
>
> No, that will produce a COPY of the group, as the name "copying" suggests
> :-)
>
> Go to your first card and then select menu:
> Object -> Place Group -> Name of your group
>
> That's it.
>
> You can also do this by script:
> ...
> place bg "name of your group here" onto card 1
> ...
>
> > Thank you
>
> Best
>
> Klaus
>
> --
> Klaus Major
> http://www.major-k.de
> kl...@major-k.de
>
>
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: adding a Shared (Background) Group after the fact

[Klaus major-k via use-livecode]

Hi Tom,

> Am 21.07.2018 um 15:31 schrieb Tom Glod via use-livecode 
> :
> 
> Hi Folks, I failed to think my stack through ahead of time and forgot to
> add a shared group to my first card before I made the other cards.
> 
> Is there a way to do that afterwards? and have a new group shared on all
> the cards?
> 
> Copying a shared group to existing cards doesn't seem to create an
> instance.

No, that will produce a COPY of the group, as the name "copying" suggests :-)

Go to your first card and then select menu: 
Object -> Place Group -> Name of your group

That's it.

You can also do this by script:
...
place bg "name of your group here" onto card 1
...

> Thank you

Best

Klaus

--
Klaus Major
http://www.major-k.de
kl...@major-k.de


___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: adding a Shared (Background) Group after the fact

[Brian Milby via use-livecode]

>From the object menu, select place group.
It can be done in code if you have too many to do by hand.
On Jul 21, 2018, 8:32 AM -0500, Tom Glod via use-livecode 
, wrote:
> Hi Folks, I failed to think my stack through ahead of time and forgot to
> add a shared group to my first card before I made the other cards.
>
> Is there a way to do that afterwards? and have a new group shared on all
> the cards?
>
> Copying a shared group to existing cards doesn't seem to create an
> instance.
>
> Thank you
> ___
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
> preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

adding a Shared (Background) Group after the fact

[Tom Glod via use-livecode]

Hi Folks, I failed to think my stack through ahead of time and forgot to
add a shared group to my first card before I made the other cards.

Is there a way to do that afterwards? and have a new group shared on all
the cards?

Copying a shared group to existing cards doesn't seem to create an
instance.

Thank you
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

Re: Datagrids and Nested Behaviors

[Niggemann, Bernd via use-livecode]

Bob,

I also found that changing the behavior of group "dataGrid x" does not stick 
and after restart you have to set it again.

However if you want to use the convenience of a behavior you could set in your 
case as far as user interaction via doubleMouseUp is concerned you could set 
the behavior of group "dgListMask" of group "dataGrid x" to the button of your 
mouseDoubleUp handler. That will save the behavior with the specific group 
"dataGrid x" and you would only have to assign this  once to that group. If you 
want to go that route be careful to choose a control inside a specific dataGrid 
that has not already a behavior assigned.
e.g. group "dgList" of group "dataGrid x" already has a behavior assigned. In 
my testing this works for mouseDoubleUp

---
on mouseDoubleUp
   put the long name of the target into tTarget
   if tTarget begins with "field" then put the text of tTarget & cr & tTarget
   else put tTarget -- does not trigger
   pass mouseDoubleUp
end mouseDoubleUp
--- 

Maybe that is an easier way to solve the global scope problem you get when 
modifiying the behaviors of the group "dataGrid x" and also of "stickiness"

Kind regards
Bernd
___
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription 
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode