Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
On lundi 03 novembre 2008, Tim Moore wrote: I've been working on effects support for FlightGear, as part of the work I've been doing on integrating shadows into the OSG version. Roughly speaking an effect is like a material for an object, but it can support different techniques based on OpenGL features and user choices. Each technique is multipass and of course supports shaders. Anyway, in doing this work I've been using the Boost library from boost.org, and I'd like to introduce it as a new dependency in FlightGear. I've used its rich support for working with STL iterators and binding functions for use with STL algorithms. More generally, I like Boost's implementation of the TR1 libraries that are being introduced in the C++0x standardization process (including a standard hash table implementation). Boost contains a ton of well-tested, useful code. I know that Boost is well supported on Linux and see that it is on Windows as well, though I have no direct experience with that. Are there any objections to or comments about adding Boost as a FlightGear dependency? Tim Are we talking about it ? http://www.boost.org/users/license.html Which is not said being GPL Cheers -- Gérard http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/ J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. Voltaire - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. We have actually gone to some effort to make sure that JSBSim compiles everywhere. Even on my cell phone. ;-) Jon - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Am Montag 03 November 2008 schrieb gerard robin: ..[boost libs introduction]... Are we talking about it ? http://www.boost.org/users/license.html Which is not said being GPL Not knowing any details, from the website it sounds like things are more complicated: Introduction The Boost Software License specifies the terms and conditions of use FOR THOSE Boost libraries THAT IT COVERS. (capitalization by me) Seems not all libs are under a maybe non GPL license and even worse, not all libs are under the same license, making this a case by case decision. Has anyone further investigated into this? Thomas - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Martin Spott wrote: Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. Erik Hofman wrote: I'm pretty sure JSBSim works nicely on IRIX. I'll give it another try soon to make sure. Jon S. Berndt wrote: We have actually gone to some effort to make sure that JSBSim compiles everywhere. Even on my cell phone. ;-) Ah, that's good to know, I'll give it yet a try on the next occasion, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Thomas Förster wrote: Am Montag 03 November 2008 schrieb gerard robin: ..[boost libs introduction]... Are we talking about it ? http://www.boost.org/users/license.html Which is not said being GPL Not knowing any details, from the website it sounds like things are more complicated: Introduction The Boost Software License specifies the terms and conditions of use FOR THOSE Boost libraries THAT IT COVERS. (capitalization by me) Seems not all libs are under a maybe non GPL license and even worse, not all libs are under the same license, making this a case by case decision. Has anyone further investigated into this? I'm not proposing that Boost source code be included in FlightGear/SimGear sources, so I don't see how the Boost license matters. That said, I wouldn't want to depend unnecessarily on proprietary libraries. Right after Thomas' quote above it goes on to say, Currently, some Boost libraries have their own licenses. The hope is that eventually all Boost libraries will be covered by the Boost Software License. In the meantime, all libraries comply with the Boost License requirements. The Boost License requirements are: * Must be simple to read and understand. * Must grant permission without fee to copy, use and modify the software for any use (commercial and non-commercial). * Must require that the license appear with all copies [including redistributions] of the software source code. * Must not require that the license appear with executables or other binary uses of the library. * Must not require that the source code be available for execution or other binary uses of the library. This all sounds nice and Open Source Friendly to me. Tim - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
As someone who uses Boost for some projects at work, there are two things to consider regarding this. One is that I believe all new libraries must be under the Boost license to be accepted (don't quote me on that) and those qualifiers were put in because before the creation of the Boost Software License individual libraries were under whatever license the author chose. The second thing to consider is that can pull in individual libraries as dependencies (i.e, only the Random, Hash and GIL libraries) rather than requiring _all_ of boost. Then libraries could be reviewed on an individual basis as acceptable dependencies. Jonathan On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 15:02:02 +0100, Thomas Förster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Am Montag 03 November 2008 schrieb gerard robin: ..[boost libs introduction]... Are we talking about it ? http://www.boost.org/users/license.html Which is not said being GPL Not knowing any details, from the website it sounds like things are more complicated: Introduction The Boost Software License specifies the terms and conditions of use FOR THOSE Boost libraries THAT IT COVERS. (capitalization by me) Seems not all libs are under a maybe non GPL license and even worse, not all libs are under the same license, making this a case by case decision. Has anyone further investigated into this? Thomas - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Jonathan Wagner - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Martin Spott wrote: Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. I'm pretty sure JSBSim works nicely on IRIX. I'll give it another try soon to make sure. Erik - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Erik Hofman wrote: I believe (with a big questionmark) that boost works fine with MIPSpro nowadays, but I wouldn't argue against it if it didn't. Well, for approx. two years now (rough guess) FlightGear reportedly - from different places - requires some GCC-isms to compile on Unix- Systems anyway. So it's not a question about wether the _dependencies_ are portable (TM) - OSG for example compiles and works nicely on Solaris, even on IRIX using their 'native' compilers and I've also been successful in compiling 'boost' on Solaris. Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. I'm getting asked regularly about the state of support for FlightGear on OpenSolaris. So, if there's someone looking for a headache, this might be a good place to start ;-)) Best regards, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
On 3 Nov 2008, at 00:30, Tim Moore wrote: I know that Boost is well supported on Linux and see that it is on Windows as well, though I have no direct experience with that. Are there any objections to or comments about adding Boost as a FlightGear dependency? My recollection is that parts of Boost (possibly the parser module?) are implemented in a templated way that can cause quite amazing code size increases. This was the reason for not using it in another project I was involved with, a couple of years ago. It may well be that improvements in compiler code-gen for templates have fixed this - or more likely, the issues is in parts of Boost that won't be touched. Regards, James - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
* Jonathan Wagner -- 11/3/2008 3:34 PM: The second thing to consider is that can pull in individual libraries as dependencies (i.e, only the Random, Hash and GIL libraries) rather than requiring _all_ of boost. Sure. I think most people knew this. But I assume it's very unlikely that anyone has only some libs of boost installed. You either have it (all of it), or you don't. So a dependency on only a few libs doesn't really make us less dependent. And *if* we accept the dependency (which seems to be as good as decided), then we can also use more of its libs without making the situation any worse. m. - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:59:34 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Erik Hofman wrote: I believe (with a big questionmark) that boost works fine with MIPSpro nowadays, but I wouldn't argue against it if it didn't. Well, for approx. two years now (rough guess) FlightGear reportedly - from different places - requires some GCC-isms to compile on Unix- Systems anyway. So it's not a question about wether the _dependencies_ are portable (TM) - OSG for example compiles and works nicely on Solaris, even on IRIX using their 'native' compilers and I've also been successful in compiling 'boost' on Solaris. Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. I'm getting asked regularly about the state of support for FlightGear on OpenSolaris. So, if there's someone looking for a headache, this might be a good place to start ;-)) ..headache, you're viciously wicked! ;o) Last time I heard about OpenSolaris, was on http://groklaw.net/ where the issues were the legal nature of their licensing, not technological, Sun's CDDL is not compatible with the GPL by design, under Sun's own corporate legal policy. Further background: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050126023359386 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050205022937327 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20041218044030728 http://www.google.com/search?num=100hl=enq=site%3Agroklaw.net+GPL+CDDLbtnG=Search ..bottom line is do not mix GPL code with CDDL code. Can be extended to find some OpenSolaris guy to do the CDDL coding, as that will allow licensing apartheid, to prevent litigation, you want firm borders around your work. Recent developments: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080729154916498 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080502163143920 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071029143159212 http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=OpenSolaris+license+site%3Agroklaw.netbtnG=Search http://www.google.com/search?num=100q=OpenSolaris+licenseie=UTF-8oe=UTF-8 -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 13:25:58 +0100, gerard wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On lundi 03 novembre 2008, Tim Moore wrote: I've been working on effects support for FlightGear, as part of the work I've been doing on integrating shadows into the OSG version. Roughly speaking an effect is like a material for an object, but it can support different techniques based on OpenGL features and user choices. Each technique is multipass and of course supports shaders. Anyway, in doing this work I've been using the Boost library from boost.org, and I'd like to introduce it as a new dependency in FlightGear. I've used its rich support for working with STL iterators and binding functions for use with STL algorithms. More generally, I like Boost's implementation of the TR1 libraries that are being introduced in the C++0x standardization process (including a standard hash table implementation). Boost contains a ton of well-tested, useful code. I know that Boost is well supported on Linux and see that it is on Windows as well, though I have no direct experience with that. Are there any objections to or comments about adding Boost as a FlightGear dependency? Tim Are we talking about it ? http://www.boost.org/users/license.html Which is not said being GPL ..is it compatible with the GPL? http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/gpl.html -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
On Tue, 4 Nov 2008 00:52:42 +0100, Arnt wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Mon, 3 Nov 2008 11:59:34 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Erik Hofman wrote: I believe (with a big questionmark) that boost works fine with MIPSpro nowadays, but I wouldn't argue against it if it didn't. Well, for approx. two years now (rough guess) FlightGear reportedly - from different places - requires some GCC-isms to compile on Unix- Systems anyway. So it's not a question about wether the _dependencies_ are portable (TM) - OSG for example compiles and works nicely on Solaris, even on IRIX using their 'native' compilers and I've also been successful in compiling 'boost' on Solaris. Instead, some places in FlightGear itself (at least Nasal and JSBSim, as far as I remember) are the factors that limit portability. I'm getting asked regularly about the state of support for FlightGear on OpenSolaris. So, if there's someone looking for a headache, this might be a good place to start ;-)) ..headache, you're viciously wicked! ;o) Last time I heard about OpenSolaris, was on http://groklaw.net/ where the issues were the legal nature of their licensing, not technological, Sun's CDDL is not compatible with the GPL by design, under Sun's own corporate legal policy. Further background: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050126023359386 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050205022937327 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20041218044030728 http://www.google.com/search?num=100hl=enq=site%3Agroklaw.net+GPL+CDDLbtnG=Search ..bottom line is do not mix GPL code with CDDL code. Can be extended to find some OpenSolaris guy to do the CDDL coding, as that will allow licensing apartheid, to prevent litigation, you want firm borders around your work. Recent developments: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080729154916498 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080502163143920 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071029143159212 http://www.google.com/search?hl=enq=OpenSolaris+license+site%3Agroklaw.netbtnG=Search http://www.google.com/search?num=100q=OpenSolaris+licenseie=UTF-8oe=UTF-8 ..the earful || zinger: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050121014650517 -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Tim Moore wrote: I've been working on effects support for FlightGear, as part of the work I've been doing on integrating shadows into the OSG version. Roughly speaking an effect is like a material for an object, but it can support different techniques based on OpenGL features and user choices. Each technique is multipass and of course supports shaders. Anyway, in doing this work I've been using the Boost library from boost.org, and I'd like to introduce it as a new dependency in FlightGear. I've used its rich support for working with STL iterators and binding functions for use with STL algorithms. More generally, I like Boost's implementation of the TR1 libraries that are being introduced in the C++0x standardization process (including a standard hash table implementation). Boost contains a ton of well-tested, useful code. I know that Boost is well supported on Linux and see that it is on Windows as well, though I have no direct experience with that. Are there any objections to or comments about adding Boost as a FlightGear dependency? I use Boost under Windows at work and for my current project, without any problem. I remember we tried to include some chunk of Boost inside Simgear in the past but had some problems with old compilers ( MipsPro ? ) and removed it. Maybe it is time to reconsider this. Boost is an incredible toolkit and our OSG version should already require competent compilers that are supported by Boost. -Fred -- Frédéric Bouvier http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/ Photo gallery - album photo http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/ FlightGear Scenery Designer - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFC: use of boost libraries
Fine with me. (I've only opposed once, but back then the only argument for pulling it in was to get printf-like fromatting in stream output, and that didn't seem enough justification for yet another dependency.) m. - This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100url=/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
