Post Reply 
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
fltk based applications
03-19-2014, 12:58 AM (This post was last modified: 03-19-2014 01:21 AM by tavvva.)
Post: #31
RE: fltk based applications
(03-18-2014 11:36 PM)george53 Wrote:  I searched the net for NVR but did get no explanation. What are you refering to?

Look here (Naming the Package):
http://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/Fedo...09s03.html

NVR = Name-Version-Release

... where the Name and the Version is defined by the upstream maintainer (you in this case) and the Release is distribution specific suffix that is appended to the NV string so that anyone can do distribution specific updates (applying local patches and doing changes in the build scriptlets which affect the final binary packages even when the source tarball generated by you stays the same).

Example:
bash-3.2-9 ... Name=bash, Version=3.2, Release=9

The above is a commonly used scheme and you should follow it if possible. That means, you should avoid using letters, dashes, underscores, etc. in the Version string. Only numbers and dots are allowed in the Version string.

You could start with fldev130-0.5.7.tgz
I'll download that source tarball and append the release number (starting with 1). And that would give me a valid NVR string for the DeLi(cate) Linux ... fldev130-0.5.7-1

(03-18-2014 11:36 PM)george53 Wrote:  Maintaining a distro is quite some work (as you probably know) and I cannot maintain all the applications included. I guess there willl be an explanation or some setting which causes this result.

You don't need to if they work correctly :] And someone could submit patches against your fork in the future, so that you won't need to patch it by yourself.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-20-2014, 08:35 AM
Post: #32
RE: fltk based applications
I plan to implement a few changes now and then will name the archive:
fldev130_x11-1.5.8

Then you can add "-1" for your purposes.

I do not like version numbers starting with zero. Since I did quite a lot of changes to the code (internally) it should not continue with 5.7

Should I make a windows version it shall be called fldev130_win32-1.5.x

Georg
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-22-2014, 10:13 PM
Post: #33
RE: fltk based applications
I just uploaded the new version. Instead of the unfinished GDB code which came in the original package I open a new console window and run GDB in there.

Georg
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 09:31 AM (This post was last modified: 03-23-2014 09:32 AM by tavvva.)
Post: #34
RE: fltk based applications
(03-20-2014 08:35 AM)george53 Wrote:  I plan to implement a few changes now and then will name the archive:
fldev130_x11-1.5.8

Then you can add "-1" for your purposes.

I do not like version numbers starting with zero. Since I did quite a lot of changes to the code (internally) it should not continue with 5.7

Should I make a windows version it shall be called fldev130_win32-1.5.x

Georg

I don't recommend to split the sources to Linux/X11 and Win32. That would produce an extra amount of work for the future contributors as they would have to sync the changes in both trees manually. Use the following or similar pre-processor conditions:

Code:
#ifdef __linux__
    //linux code goes here
#elif _WIN32
    // windows code goes here
#else

#endif

... you can state, that the current version only supports linux
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-23-2014, 10:02 AM (This post was last modified: 03-23-2014 11:55 AM by george53.)
Post: #35
RE: fltk based applications
Yes, I had planned to make just one source package for all platforms using the #if commands you mentioned. At the moment there are several #if MSDOS commands in there already.

I wish there would be contributors but I have my doubts currently whether there will be many. However, Laura already supplied patches for Windows.

The windows version could include a Windows binary. But I will see when I get to it.

Georg
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-25-2014, 09:35 PM
Post: #36
RE: fltk based applications
(03-23-2014 10:02 AM)george53 Wrote:  Yes, I had planned to make just one source package for all platforms using the #if commands you mentioned. At the moment there are several #if MSDOS commands in there already.

I wish there would be contributors but I have my doubts currently whether there will be many. However, Laura already supplied patches for Windows.

The windows version could include a Windows binary. But I will see when I get to it.

Georg

Should I wait for the unified source archive?

I'll probably 'steal' few ideas from Nanolinux :]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-25-2014, 10:10 PM
Post: #37
RE: fltk based applications
I posted the Linux version of FlDev and will not make a new version just to include the #ifdef _WIN32 parts in the Linux code. So I would say you can use it.

What do you plan to steal from Nanolinux? Wink
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-26-2014, 09:00 PM (This post was last modified: 03-26-2014 09:09 PM by tavvva.)
Post: #38
RE: fltk based applications
(03-25-2014 10:10 PM)george53 Wrote:  I posted the Linux version of FlDev and will not make a new version just to include the #ifdef _WIN32 parts in the Linux code. So I would say you can use it.

I meant just the tarball filename change. The previous version of fldev probably doesn't work in Windows too and even of that it has no x11 suffix Smile

(03-25-2014 10:10 PM)george53 Wrote:  What do you plan to steal from Nanolinux? Wink

Names of interesting FLTK apps mainly.

I have a question. Have you paid US$220.00 to distrowatch folks? Don't answer if you don't want to. I'm just trying to find out what we're missing.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-26-2014, 11:00 PM
Post: #39
RE: fltk based applications
I will make separate versions for DOS and Windows. The DOS version will include a compiled executable and the fltk libraries and the Windows version a stripped-down version of MinGW plus the fltk libraries.

No I did not pay Distrowatch 220 dollars. If I would there would be an ad for Nanolinux on the Distrowatch web site that I paid with the 220 dollars. I was thinking of doing that because I want to make Nanolinux well known. Maybe I will do so some time in the future.

First I sent an email to Distrowatch and Nanolinux was added to the waiting list. That already caused about 5000 downloads in two months. Probably people wanted to see how a desktop Linux distro could be made in 14 MB only.
Then I sent an email to Distrowatch mentioning that Nanolinux had so many downloads which would put it somewhere in the middle of their list if it would be listed. That caused them to take a second look at Nanolinux and list it with Distrowatch.

What I did not understand at first is that the Distrowatch counter just counts the hits to the Nanolinux description page on Distrowatch, not the downloads on my webpage. Still this seems to give some indication for the amount of interest people have in a particular distribution.
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
03-27-2014, 01:12 PM
Post: #40
RE: fltk based applications
(03-26-2014 11:00 PM)george53 Wrote:  First I sent an email to Distrowatch and Nanolinux was added to the waiting list. That already caused about 5000 downloads in two months. Probably people wanted to see how a desktop Linux distro could be made in 14 MB only.
Then I sent an email to Distrowatch mentioning that Nanolinux had so many downloads which would put it somewhere in the middle of their list if it would be listed. That caused them to take a second look at Nanolinux and list it with Distrowatch.

What I did not understand at first is that the Distrowatch counter just counts the hits to the Nanolinux description page on Distrowatch, not the downloads on my webpage. Still this seems to give some indication for the amount of interest people have in a particular distribution.

Well. We have more than 10 unique ISO downloads a day (excluding robots), what makes hundreds of downloads a month and that's lower number, but I consider it excellent for this kind of distro.

And you're right. The distrowatch counters cannot be used for popularity evaluation.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Contact Us | DeLi(cate) Linux | Return to Top | Return to Content | Lite (Archive) Mode | RSS Syndication