[PD] Guenter's personal CVS version of Gem 0.87

[guenter geiger]

Hi Ben,

it is most likely that the behaviouryou see is a bug in the
CVS. (I exoanded texture in order to include texture2)

 I recommend that you are using the new CVS version
(mine is due to disappear soon).

Well, you will have to go through the compilation again, the good thing is
though, that this time we can fix problems that might accure once and for
all.

Would be great it you could take note of the steps you are going
through for compilation, so we can setup a kind of FAQ for
compilation instructions for different platforms, distributions.

If you have questions, feel free to ask.

Greetings

Guenter

On Sun, 1 Dec 2002 bbogart at ryerson.ca wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I'm currently using Guenter's personal CVS version
> of gem-0.87. This is before the real cvs was up and
> running. I used it because I could not get the
> normal 87 version compiled.
>
> Anyhow I've discovered something which behaves
> different in this version (under linux) than it does
> in windows (with the normal 87 version)
>
> I have a bunch of squares using pix_image and
> pix_texture as well as a few using pix_movie. When I
> use the pix_image geometry by itself all works fine,
> works as it should. As soon as I add the pix_movie
> geometry (different objects) it CHANGES the way the
> pix_texture applies the pix_image to the other
> geometry. These are not attached in any way, no send
> or receive, no separator, different geometry and
> differet gemheads. If I cut the pix_movie geometry
> out of the patch and rerender, boom it works as
> normal again. So I did I little experiment and added
> pix_texture after pix_movie, even though you don't
> need it. And low and beyhold, the pix_texture
> applies the pix_movie onto the geometry in the same
> messed up fashion as pix_texture applies pix_image
> to the other geometry. (looks like x if shifted
> towards negative about half the width of the
> geometry and y is shifted towards negative the same
> amount) I don't reproduce this under windows.
>
> So I'm going to try and compile .87 again, on a
> different machine, and see if its an alteration in
> Guenter's version?
>
> Can anyone else see how the way a texture is applied
> to one object changes how the texture is applied to
> another?!? It seems to be just pix_movie doing this...
>
> I'll work out a demo patch as soon as I can.
>
> Thanks
> Ben
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> PD-list mailing list
> PD-list at iem.kug.ac.at
> http://iem.kug.ac.at/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pd-list
>