BWView

From: Dave (dfisher_at_pophost.com)
Date: 2002-03-01 08:04:06


Jim-P and Doug--could you do me a favor since you both have compiled versions
of BWView? I have spent this evening trying to resolve the display disparity
between Jim-P's binary version and mine, all to no avail. Doug--I am assuming
that you get the same results when you run your compiled version as compared to
Jim's.

Jim--I have removed the Debian installs of FFTW and SDL, verified that they
were indeed gone from /usr/lib, /usr/include/SDL, etc., and recompiled the
sources. At that point, the only libs/headers that could be found for these
packages were in the /usr/local hierarchy. And yet, same results. I also have
both gcc 2.95 and 3.0 installed on my system, so compiled everything with
gcc-2.95. Again, same results. I am not 100% confindent that there are no
collisions between 2.95 and 3.0, but fairly confident as Debian/unstable has
everything linked to separate directories so both versions of the compiler can
coexist together.

So, at this point, our systems are very similiar except for the version of X
Windows we are running (well, at least compared to Doug's, I'm not sure about
yours, Jim), but the graphics display does not seem to be the nature of the
problem; it really looks like a completely new data set is being displayed --
which makes me suspect FFTW. I read the FFTW docs, looking for references to
the 64-bit library you mentioned. Except for the mention of different integer
sizes, I do not see where they make a distinction between 32-bit/64-bit
compilations. Can this really be the problem? I would think your build and
mine are from the same vanilla setup -- ./configure, make, make install.

So... now the favor from both of you. I have uploaded two binaries to my web
site (these are Linux-only, folks). Could you run these on your systems and
see if your results match the original binary that you, Jim, included in your
release? This will help narrow down the possibilities. The two binaries are
as follows:

bwview-dave-static-fftw (~470kb)
bwview-dave-shared-fftw (~60kb)

Jim--I now understand the difference in our binary file sizes. While you are
linking into the shared libraries for SDL, you have statically linked with
FFTW. I don't know if that was intentional or not. But when I had the Debian
installed versions of FFTW on my, they had both the static as well as sharable
libraries. When I got rid of them and recompiled FFTW, I noticed that the
default was to create only the static (.a) libs.

So I recompiled FFTW so that it created the sharable libraries, and compiled a
new BWView binary (bwview-dave-shared-fftw). Notice the size difference. In
order to compile the sharable libs, you'll need to

make clean
./configure --enable-shared
make
make install

and then 'mk' to get a new BWView binary.

If bwview-dave-shared-fftw works, but bwview-dave-static-fftw does not, then we
have identified FFTW as the problem. If they both work, then we know that the
problem is in one of the other shareable libs on my system, and FFTW is fine.
If neither of them work, well, I guess we did not narrow down anything, as it
could still be something compiling differently here with one of the packages,
or some other difference in our respective systems.

The binaries are at http://www.psychosensory.com/files/bwview-dave.tar.gz.

Here's hoping....

Dave.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : 2002-07-27 12:28:39 BST