[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?
From: |
John W. Eaton |
Subject: |
Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ? |
Date: |
Sat, 28 Jan 2012 23:19:37 -0500 |
On 28-Jan-2012, Ben Abbott wrote:
| I'm able to fix the problem. I've been reverting your reversion below and
thought it was a MacOS X only thing.
|
|
http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/diff/1367f2db49a2/src/graphics.cc
|
| With the sources up to date and reverting this specific changeset, the fltk
output works correctly for me.
|
| If you apply the simple change below, does the fltk toolkit work as expected ?
Unfortunately, no. It fails for a pair of figures that are generated
in some horribly complicated way by an example from the MTEX package
(http://code.google.com/p/mtex).
If you are really interested, you can try to see the problem by doing
the following:
* Download mtex 3.2.2
* Unpack it and cd to the mtex-3.2.2 directory
* Edit the file mtex_settings.m and uncomment the line
%set_mtex_option('GrainSelector','off')
* Create symbolic link in c/bin for your architecture. This
directory has some binaries (ick, I know) for systems that run
Matlab. For my system, I needed to do
ln -s glnxa64 -> gnu-linux-x86_64
in the c/bin directory
* In the top-level directory, run Octave and type
startup_mtex
(answer no to the question about installing mtex globally)
warning off Octave:missing-glyph
more off
graphics_toolkit fltk
grain_demo
You should get two plots that look something like the first pair of
screenshots attached below. With the current stable sources, this is
what I see. With your small patch applied, I get the second set of
badly sized and blank plots.
But these plot is generated by so much code spread around in many places
that I think it will be very hard to debug.
jwe
- patch to be applied to default or stable ?, (continued)
- patch to be applied to default or stable ?, John W. Eaton, 2012/01/15
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/15
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/17
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, John W. Eaton, 2012/01/17
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/17
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, John W. Eaton, 2012/01/28
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/28
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, John W. Eaton, 2012/01/28
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/28
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/28
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?,
John W. Eaton <=
- Re: patch to be applied to default or stable ?, Ben Abbott, 2012/01/29