Overview
Examples
Screenshots
Comparisons
Applications
Download
Documentation
Tutorials
Bazaar
Status & Roadmap
FAQ
Authors & License
Forums
Funding Ultimate++
Search on this site
Search in forums












SourceForge.net Logo
Home » Developing U++ » Releasing U++ » Welcome and lets finish that 2007.1
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8690 is a reply to message #8687] Sat, 24 March 2007 18:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
unodgs is currently offline  unodgs
Messages: 1354
Registered: November 2005
Location: Poland
Senior Contributor

luzr wrote on Sat, 24 March 2007 12:05


* "Glossy theme bug in Ubuntu", Daniel, do you experience it after recompiling? (I do not Wink


You were right about the old version of ide. I will check the new one ASAP.
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8700 is a reply to message #8687] Mon, 26 March 2007 03:32 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
Mirek,

Sorry for the delay. Something sent me out like a light for the weelend, and I slept most of it away...

At the moment I simply reset the mouse to "focus under mouse" instead of "focus strictly under mouse". That solved the problem for the moment. I'll have to look into it in detail to see if the changes are actually in place (and to make sure that the gentoo build scripts are actually pulling down the proper source). Here are a couple of quick details:

The source is downloaded from:
http://downloads.sourceforge.net/upp/upp-2007.1_rc3/upp-src- 2007.1rc3.zip

I do not load any other source patches, just the Makefile and GCC.bm

EBo --
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8730 is a reply to message #8690] Wed, 28 March 2007 14:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
unodgs wrote on Sat, 24 March 2007 13:48

luzr wrote on Sat, 24 March 2007 12:05


* "Glossy theme bug in Ubuntu", Daniel, do you experience it after recompiling? (I do not Wink


You were right about the old version of ide. I will check the new one ASAP.



Well, I hopefully fixed focus problem, maybe it is now time for "ASAP" Smile

Mirek
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8744 is a reply to message #8730] Wed, 28 March 2007 21:10 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
unodgs,

remember to replace the user copy of uppsrc with the system level sources which will be updated. I wasted a bunch of time with that one when I updated the system source, but never thought about what source tree my apps were being compiled off of...

Hope that helps and is correct,

EBo --
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8750 is a reply to message #8744] Wed, 28 March 2007 22:48 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
ebojd wrote on Wed, 28 March 2007 15:10

unodgs,

remember to replace the user copy of uppsrc with the system level sources which will be updated. I wasted a bunch of time with that one when I updated the system source, but never thought about what source tree my apps were being compiled off of...

Hope that helps and is correct,

EBo --



Well, I guess, after syncing uvs and releasing U++ (albeit Win32 version) for more than year, Daniel knows how to compile TheIDE Smile

Mirek
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8755 is a reply to message #8744] Thu, 29 March 2007 08:41 Go to previous messageGo to next message
unodgs is currently offline  unodgs
Messages: 1354
Registered: November 2005
Location: Poland
Senior Contributor

Thanks for the warning. Fortunately I use makeinstall which always copy the newest uvs sources before compiling.
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8758 is a reply to message #8755] Thu, 29 March 2007 14:31 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member

Embarassed ummm... Confused well... Rolling Eyes

just trying to be helpful. Hope I did not offend or insult. *that* was not my intent.

BTW, do you keep a single copy of the source in /usr/share/upp (or similar), or do you also have a copy of the source in ~/upp/uppsrc, ~/upp/Common, etc.? It was the latter which cam back to byte me.

EBo --

[Updated on: Thu, 29 March 2007 14:40]

Report message to a moderator

Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8759 is a reply to message #8758] Thu, 29 March 2007 14:51 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
ebojd wrote on Thu, 29 March 2007 08:31


Embarassed ummm... Confused well... Rolling Eyes

just trying to be helpful. Hope I did not offend or insult. *that* was not my intent.

BTW, do you keep a single copy of the source in /usr/share/upp (or similar), or do you also have a copy of the source in ~/upp/uppsrc, ~/upp/Common, etc.? It was the latter which cam back to byte me.

EBo --



Well, I have sources on FAT32 partition, so that I can use the same files for both Win32 and Linux. On Linux, it is something like /media/sda5/uppsrc...

I almost always use "actual" version of U++ for everything, including my commercial apps.

Mirek
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8762 is a reply to message #8759] Thu, 29 March 2007 16:01 Go to previous messageGo to next message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Thu, 29 March 2007 07:51


Well, I have sources on FAT32 partition, so that I can use the same files for both Win32 and Linux. On Linux, it is something like /media/sda5/uppsrc...

I almost always use "actual" version of U++ for everything, including my commercial apps.

Mirek


Thank makes sense, and I'll have to meditate on that one a bit.

How do you deal with user side applications which require specific versions of u++ source?

EBo --
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8765 is a reply to message #8762] Thu, 29 March 2007 17:38 Go to previous messageGo to next message
mirek is currently offline  mirek
Messages: 12105
Registered: November 2005
Ultimate Member
ebojd wrote on Thu, 29 March 2007 10:01


How do you deal with user side applications which require specific versions of u++ source?



Special version of U++? Why?

Well, one thing is perhaps relevant - U++ development was for quite a long time "bussines app driven" - U++ was simply extended to satisfy demands of our customers.

Also, sometimes we refactor interface. Usually, this means fixing all applications, and yes, it is a bit annoying, but that is the price of perfection (and hopefuly, this will not happen too much in future).

BTW, "uppsrc" has more packages than you see in normal release. Many of them are "backward compatibility", some of them experimental or supporting some specific application (or simply not stable and refined enough).

Mirek
Re: Linux Makefile(s) [message #8770 is a reply to message #8765] Thu, 29 March 2007 17:53 Go to previous message
ebojd is currently offline  ebojd
Messages: 225
Registered: January 2007
Location: USA
Experienced Member
luzr wrote on Thu, 29 March 2007 10:38


Special version of U++? Why?

Well, one thing is perhaps relevant - U++ development was for quite a long time "bussines app driven" - U++ was simply extended to satisfy demands of our customers.

Also, sometimes we refactor interface. Usually, this means fixing all applications, and yes, it is a bit annoying, but that is the price of perfection (and hopefuly, this will not happen too much in future).

BTW, "uppsrc" has more packages than you see in normal release. Many of them are "backward compatibility", some of them experimental or supporting some specific application (or simply not stable and refined enough).

Mirek



When I ran into the problem of my code compiling libraries from ~/upp/uppsrc/* instead of the new ones in /usr/share/upp/uppsrc/* I got to thinking about why having a seperate copy would be necessary or useful. The most obvious would be for long term application maintenance, by bundling the library code. I had not realized (when I first ran u++) what the implications of having a copy of uppsrc, etc., made to ~/upp/. After thinking about it a little while I realized that library versions could be managed similar to how portage deals with multiple versions of libraries using slots, and they can be compiled against specific revisions of the source...

Hmmm... I just realized that this discussion is in releasing u++ and not in the coffee corner where I intended to keep it. How does one move a discussion to a different forum?

Anyway, thanks for the great work, the discussion, and putting up with my ramblings whilst I learn the system.

EBo --
Previous Topic: GCC.bm problems
Next Topic: OK, time to release.... (finally).
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Nov 20 06:38:05 CET 2019

Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01948 seconds