Well, Once Fons said (with sarcasm though) that they perhaps should sell ROOT for windows as everybody does in the windows community and since windows itself is a commercial os. Perhaps this is right the solution. Instead of having lot of holes in the win distribution: missing GUI, threads, installations, crashes and so on and still trying to maintain win version, why don't you start taking money and employ _real_ windows experts. I mean you can not get _real_ windows experts for free. That's what we've been dealing with during last several years. _Real_ windows experts work for money: why on the Earth one should learn windows to write free soft for ROOT? Or should we give up windows distribution? Regards, Anton ----- Original Message ----- From: Nick van Eijndhoven <Nick@phys.uu.nl> To: Anton Fokin <anton.fokin@smartquant.com> Cc: roottalk <roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch>; Fons Rademakers <Fons.Rademakers@cern.ch>; <dcasper@uci.edu> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 3:43 PM Subject: Re: [ROOT] Making test example on win98 > Hi Anton, > It is indeed the crashes etc... w.r.t. some canvas actions which I am referring to. > For instance, if you have a histo and rightclick on one of the axes in order to > enter an axis title, the canvas disappears as soon as you have entered the text. > In the browser one can still see the canvas, but the only way of getting the > plot (in which indeed the axis text appears correctly) back again is to create > a new canvas and draw the histo again in that canvas. > Setting selection criteria by rightclicking in a TTreeViewer window however > directly results in a crash of the ROOT session. > Note that TTreeViewer also automatically opens 2 windows instead of only 1. > The latter has been observed also by the ROOT developers as far as I have understood > but so far the problem hasn't been fixed yet. > > In creating and executing my private programs and libs (i.e. 'batch' work), > everything works fine with the latest versions as far as I can see. > So, it is mainly the interactive analysis work which can not be performed > with version later than 2.22/10 on win98 machines, but needless to say > this is a very important feature which needs to function properly. > > Cheers, > Nick. > > -- > Dr. Nick van Eijndhoven mailto:nick@phys.uu.nl http://www.phys.uu.nl/~nick > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Org.: Utrecht University/Nikhef, Department of Subatomic Physics > Address: P.O. Box 80.000, NL-3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands > Phone: +31-30-2532331(direct) +31-30-2531492(secr.) Fax: +31-30-2518689 > NIKHEF: +31-20-5922028(direct) +31-20-5922000(secr.) Fax: +31-20-5925155 > CERN: +41-22-7679751(direct) +41-22-7675857(secr.) Fax: +41-22-7679480 > Offices: Buys Ballot lab. 710 (Utrecht) H350 (Nikhef) B23 1-020 (CERN) > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Anton Fokin wrote: > > > > Hi Nick, > > > > actually I am not creating ROOT binaries from scratch but rather trying to > > compile my own (unix) project on win98. What are the problems around root > > 3.02 bins on win98? I've been quite successful with making my libs under > > win98 and running exe and scripts, although I have noted that root crashes > > on some actions with canvas etc. > > > > PS. to "installshield" discussion. I checked out InstallShield coming with > > MSVC... It has "change registry" part in the install script, so what's the > > problem with setting paths under install? On the other hand what prevents > > you from writing a few lines in the shield script which will manually add > > two lines in autoexec.bat file? You have to restart com then but who > > cares... > > > > Regards, > > Anton > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Nick van Eijndhoven <Nick@phys.uu.nl> > > To: Anton Fokin <anton.fokin@smartquant.com> > > Cc: roottalk <roottalk@pcroot.cern.ch>; Fons Rademakers > > <Fons.Rademakers@cern.ch>; <dcasper@uci.edu> > > Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2001 12:55 PM > > Subject: Re: [ROOT] Making test example on win98 > > > > > Hi Anton, > > > I am pleased to hear that you are creating ROOT binaries from scratch > > > on a Win98 platform. > > > As you know after ROOT 2.22/10 I have several problems when running the > > > ROOT binaries from the web on my win98 machine (you can ask Valery Fine > > > for details if you want). So win98 users are basically bound to stay with > > > the old 2.22/10 version. > > > I would like to suggest that once you have succeeded to create a > > completely > > > working set of ROOT binaries on a win98 system, that this version will > > also > > > be made available to the outside world via the ROOT web pages. > > > On the pages one could then indicate this version as win98 specific. > > > Could the ROOT team please consider this, since in our group many people > > > use laptops and for these things we have the feeling that the flexible > > win98 > > > OS is much more convenient than winNT or win2000. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Nick. > > > > > > -- > > > Dr. Nick van Eijndhoven mailto:nick@phys.uu.nl http://www.phys.uu.nl/~nick > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > Org.: Utrecht University/Nikhef, Department of Subatomic Physics > > > Address: P.O. Box 80.000, NL-3508 TA Utrecht, The Netherlands > > > Phone: +31-30-2532331(direct) +31-30-2531492(secr.) Fax: +31-30-2518689 > > > NIKHEF: +31-20-5922028(direct) +31-20-5922000(secr.) Fax: +31-20-5925155 > > > CERN: +41-22-7679751(direct) +41-22-7675857(secr.) Fax: +41-22-7679480 > > > Offices: Buys Ballot lab. 710 (Utrecht) H350 (Nikhef) B23 1-020 (CERN) > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > Anton Fokin wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > well, I was using Makefile included in the test directory. Yes, I saw > > > > Makefile.win32 in the same directory and I have tryied this one too (and > > it > > > > works somehow). Anyway, I suppose that if there is a Makefile in the > > binary > > > > distribution, it should be naturally related to this specific version of > > the > > > > distribution, so that a user can type nmake and get things compiled. > > > > Moreover, there is "win32" portion of lines in the Makefile, so that I > > > > assume this file is the correct one. > > > > > > > > Anyway, what I need is a makefile which works on both linux and win32, > > > > depending on a platform. Do we have such clever one? I am not win32/VC > > > > expert, so that I would like to get my linux root programs easily > > recompiled > > > > under win32. I thought I can use generic ROOT test Makefile upper part > > for > > > > that... Can I? > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Anton > > > > > > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 01 2002 - 17:50:34 MET