Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Lance Corrimal
Hi, that needs to be done in three separate files, right? done that. I would rather have a fix that doesn't patch the sources but re- adds fmodex/ to the include path, but this will do in a pinch. cheers, LC Am Montag 24 März 2014, 20:42:36 schrieb Ardy Lay: I worked around it for now:

Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Jonathan Welch
In the past few days viewer-development just received some fixes for fmodex -- are you building from the most recent sources? On 3/25/14, Lance Corrimal lance.corri...@eregion.de wrote: Hi, that needs to be done in three separate files, right? done that. I would rather have a fix that

Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Jonathan Welch
Yes, sorry, I meant viewer-release (it is pretty early in the morning here!) ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting

Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Ardy Lay
Three files each got a little of this treatment, yes. And I don't expect this to be the right way to do it. It's just me steering around an obstacle that I suspect is caused by something in a make file. I wanted a viewer with this fmodex fix in it to play with. On 3/25/2014 4:08 AM, Lance

Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Monty Brandenberg
On 3/25/2014 6:58 AM, Ardy Lay wrote: Three files each got a little of this treatment, yes. And I don't expect this to be the right way to do it. It's just me steering around an obstacle that I suspect is caused by something in a make file. Problem is in FMODEX.cmake. A change I made didn't

Re: [opensource-dev] where do i get 3p-fmodex?

2014-03-25 Thread Ardy Lay
/me takes a quick glance are file revision history. Oh! Heh. Yes. One little edit beats five. On 3/25/2014 10:33 AM, Monty Brandenberg wrote: On 3/25/2014 6:58 AM, Ardy Lay wrote: Three files each got a little of this treatment, yes. And I don't expect this to be the right way to do it.