|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
I'm getting it figured out... It's missing texlive packages but I don't want to install EVERYTHING because there's tons of packages, so I'm having to find what's missing one at a time and keep trying
I'm getting it figured out... It's missing texlive packages but I don't want to install EVERYTHING because there's tons of packages, so I'm having to find what's missing one at a time and keep trying
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1654
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
In my previous email I pasted the output from building the pdf documentation. For some reason pdflatex is getting to an interactive prompt which is of course bad when trying to build a package :)
In my previous email I pasted the output from building the pdf documentation. For some reason pdflatex is getting to an interactive prompt which is of course bad when trying to build a package :)
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1653
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
What issues are you having with the documentation?
What issues are you having with the documentation?
|
By
Sean Cooper <se...@...>
·
#1658
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Yes, this is with the PR already being applied as a patch, I appear to only be having issues with building the documentation. I can disable that but I would hate to release a new package without the
Yes, this is with the PR already being applied as a patch, I appear to only be having issues with building the documentation. I can disable that but I would hate to release a new package without the
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1652
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Richard, have you tested Patrick's PR for the GCC fixes? I'm looking to release today and don't want to slot in unnecessary commits to the release, they have already been merged to master so will show
Richard, have you tested Patrick's PR for the GCC fixes? I'm looking to release today and don't want to slot in unnecessary commits to the release, they have already been merged to master so will show
|
By
Sean Cooper <se...@...>
·
#1657
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Ok, so I "fixed" it by adding --install-dir to all the python external projects but now I run into this:
[ 61%] Building pdf doc
cd
Ok, so I "fixed" it by adding --install-dir to all the python external projects but now I run into this:
[ 61%] Building pdf doc
cd
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1651
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Yeah, I've thought about it. I actually added most of the USE_EXTERNAL... stuff when I first got OCIO in Fedora but I have far fewer free cycles these days.
Thanks,
Richard
Yeah, I've thought about it. I actually added most of the USE_EXTERNAL... stuff when I first got OCIO in Fedora but I have far fewer free cycles these days.
Thanks,
Richard
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1650
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
If you have some time you could do a pull request :) to help the community...
If you have some time you could do a pull request :) to help the community...
|
By
Patrick Hodoul <patric...@...>
·
#1649
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
I think that's because ubuntu uses debian's scheme instead of /usr/lib{,64} like RPM based distros. Either way, there's still the question about why the system installed setuptools isn't
I think that's because ubuntu uses debian's scheme instead of /usr/lib{,64} like RPM based distros. Either way, there's still the question about why the system installed setuptools isn't
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1648
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
double-checked using the ubuntu 16 & gcc 5.4.0 docker image and setuptools is working fine.
double-checked using the ubuntu 16 & gcc 5.4.0 docker image and setuptools is working fine.
|
By
Patrick Hodoul <patric...@...>
·
#1646
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Ok, next error, setuptools is built thinking it needs /usr/lib but installs to /usr/lib64 (as it should) and then it gets confused.
Side question: Why do we have to build a bundled setuptools instead
Ok, next error, setuptools is built thinking it needs /usr/lib but installs to /usr/lib64 (as it should) and then it gets confused.
Side question: Why do we have to build a bundled setuptools instead
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1647
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Please have a look to PR #498 to have the standalone fix (for gcc 5.4.0)
Please have a look to PR #498 to have the standalone fix (for gcc 5.4.0)
|
By
Patrick Hodoul <patric...@...>
·
#1645
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Using newer gcc version (i.e. 7.2.1), you are facing new warnings.
Please have a look to PR 488 where most of your problems should have been
Using newer gcc version (i.e. 7.2.1), you are facing new warnings.
Please have a look to PR 488 where most of your problems should have been
|
By
Patrick Hodoul <patric...@...>
·
#1642
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Ok, so I changed to yaml-cpp 0.5.x (was still using 0.3.x) and got past cmake, now:
/home/build/rpmbuild/OpenColorIO/BUILD/OpenColorIO-RB-1.1/src/core/Lut1DOp.cpp:192:14: error: 'void
Ok, so I changed to yaml-cpp 0.5.x (was still using 0.3.x) and got past cmake, now:
/home/build/rpmbuild/OpenColorIO/BUILD/OpenColorIO-RB-1.1/src/core/Lut1DOp.cpp:192:14: error: 'void
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1644
·
|
|
Re: 1.1.0 Release
Trying to do a test build on Fedora Rawhide but I'm getting an error:
+ /usr/bin/cmake -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG
Trying to do a test build on Fedora Rawhide but I'm getting an error:
+ /usr/bin/cmake -DCMAKE_C_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG -DCMAKE_CXX_FLAGS_RELEASE:STRING=-DNDEBUG
|
By
Richard Shaw <hobbe...@...>
·
#1643
·
|
|
1.1.0 Release
Hello all,
With the help of our lovely contributors, we have just set up the 1.1.0 release branch. This is currently regarded as a Release Candidate since the official 1.1.0 tag has not been assigned
Hello all,
With the help of our lovely contributors, we have just set up the 1.1.0 release branch. This is currently regarded as a Release Candidate since the official 1.1.0 tag has not been assigned
|
By
Sean Cooper <se...@...>
·
#1641
·
|
|
Re: OCIO 1.0.10
Happy New Year everyone!
After some time we finally have some good news. With the help of our lovely contributors over many years, we have just set up the Release Candidate branch for OCIO 1.1.0
Happy New Year everyone!
After some time we finally have some good news. With the help of our lovely contributors over many years, we have just set up the Release Candidate branch for OCIO 1.1.0
|
By
Sean Cooper <se...@...>
·
#1640
·
|
|
Re: Slack invite
I'd love to join too.
By
Espen Nordahl <espen....@...>
·
#1639
·
|
|
Re: Slack invite
I'd like to join as well, thanks
-------------------------------
Simon Björk
Compositor/TD
+46 (0)70-2859503
www.bjorkvisuals.com
2017-12-16 16:39 GMT+01:00 Chris Offner <chriso...@...>:
I'd like to join as well, thanks
-------------------------------
Simon Björk
Compositor/TD
+46 (0)70-2859503
www.bjorkvisuals.com
2017-12-16 16:39 GMT+01:00 Chris Offner <chriso...@...>:
|
By
Simon Björk <bjork...@...>
·
#1638
·
|
|
Re: Slack invite
Shid...@... too if you don't mind :)
Thanks!
Shid...@... too if you don't mind :)
Thanks!
|
By
Sean Wallitsch <shid...@...>
·
#1637
·
|