bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion - page 5 - General Discussion and Assistance - CHDK Forum supplierdeeply
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down

bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion

  • 52 Replies
  • 17938 Views
*

Offline waterwingz

  • ******
  • 12076
    • Waterwingz
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #40 on: 07 / March / 2012, 15:26:57 »
Advertisements
Quote from: rudi on 07 / March / 2012, 14:04:03
No, not in this time. Maybe in the future. I'm not sure we will handle the change to module version. A second autobuild? Current version from your branch and module version from DE trunk?
Did I miss something ?  Was this not why everyone was working on this ?  If we don't merge things,  seems like they will tend to seperate again ?
Logged
Ported :   A1200    SD940   G10    Powershot N    G16
*

Online reyalp

  • ******
  • 13123
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #41 on: 07 / March / 2012, 16:03:17 »
Quote from: waterwingz on 07 / March / 2012, 15:26:57
Quote from: rudi on 07 / March / 2012, 14:04:03
No, not in this time. Maybe in the future. I'm not sure we will handle the change to module version. A second autobuild? Current version from your branch and module version from DE trunk?
Did I miss something ?  Was this not why everyone was working on this ?  If we don't merge things,  seems like they will tend to seperate again ?
My understanding was the whole point was to get CHDKDE features in the trunk, not the release build, so that for the next release we don't need to have the CHDKDE/CHDK split.

I don't see *any* reason to make CHDK 1.0 compatible with CHDKDE. This seems like a huge waste of effort to me, except to the extent that it makes the chdkde/trunk integration easier.

The point is to make it so that there doesn't need to be a chdkde branch of the 1.1/trunk/module tree.
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Online reyalp

  • ******
  • 13123
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #42 on: 08 / March / 2012, 00:24:10 »
Quote from: rudi on 07 / March / 2012, 14:04:03
A other way for OPT_LUA_CALL_NATIVE is an additional option in script menu. This option block to register native functions in luascript.c. CHDKLover tested this alternative succeed. In his code can't this option set with set_config_value().
I've thought about this in various forms, but I'm reluctant to do this, because it's quite trivial to bypass. You can use file IO to access the conf directly, or poke to change the value in memory. I'd prefer enabling native calls be default over giving people a false sense of security.

Of course, you can already use poke to run arbitrary code if you want. Trying to safely sandbox scripts would be a lot of effort.
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline msl

  • *****
  • 1274
  • A720 IS, SX220 HS 1.01a
    • CHDK-DE links
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #43 on: 17 / March / 2012, 15:42:30 »
I would like to say thanks to rudi and phil for a wonderful work to re-align CHDK & CHDK-DE.

This was a great step for ONE CHDK!

Thank you.

msl
Logged
CHDK-DE:  CHDK-DE links
*

Offline rudi

  • ***
  • 126
  • A590IS_101B, SX260HS_100B
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #44 on: 19 / March / 2012, 17:00:05 »
I'm not sure if rev. 1745 the right way. Currently is DE-trunk only patched from CHDK. That's not useful. My favorite for come together is, we use only CHDK-trunk for both.
Attached is an possible alternative. This works also with CHDK-Shell. But CHDK-Shell can't process OPT-changing outside buildconf.inc.
On DE-buildserver can locate a localbuildconf.inc with presets and we can also add folders in CHDK directory without changing makefile.

What's your opinion?

rudi
Logged
*

Offline philmoz

  • *****
  • 3285
    • Photos
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #45 on: 23 / March / 2012, 17:49:36 »
Quote from: rudi on 19 / March / 2012, 17:00:05
I'm not sure if rev. 1745 the right way. Currently is DE-trunk only patched from CHDK. That's not useful. My favorite for come together is, we use only CHDK-trunk for both.
Attached is an possible alternative. This works also with CHDK-Shell. But CHDK-Shell can't process OPT-changing outside buildconf.inc.
On DE-buildserver can locate a localbuildconf.inc with presets and we can also add folders in CHDK directory without changing makefile.

What's your opinion?

rudi

Thanks for that, I like this version better.

I've implemented this for the development trunk in revision 1763, with a few small changes.
Let me know what you think.

With this version OPT_DE_VERSION, and OPT_LUA_CALL_NATIVE would be set in localbuildconf.inc for CHDK-DE.

(Haven't put it into the release-1.0 branch)

Phil.
Logged
CHDK ports:
  sx30is (1.00c, 1.00h, 1.00l, 1.00n & 1.00p)
  g12 (1.00c, 1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  sx130is (1.01d & 1.01f)
  ixus310hs (1.00a & 1.01a)
  sx40hs (1.00d, 1.00g & 1.00i)
  g1x (1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  g5x (1.00c, 1.01a, 1.01b)
  g7x2 (1.01a, 1.01b, 1.10b)
*

Offline rudi

  • ***
  • 126
  • A590IS_101B, SX260HS_100B
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #46 on: 29 / March / 2012, 07:07:51 »
Empty folder are absent in downloaded trunk zip-files. In this case CHDK/DATA folder. A good solution is provided here by wim.

rudi
Logged
*

Offline philmoz

  • *****
  • 3285
    • Photos
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #47 on: 30 / March / 2012, 03:51:05 »
Quote from: rudi on 29 / March / 2012, 07:07:51
Empty folder are absent in downloaded trunk zip-files. In this case CHDK/DATA folder. A good solution is provided here by wim.

rudi

Should be fixed in revision 1774.

Phil.
Logged
CHDK ports:
  sx30is (1.00c, 1.00h, 1.00l, 1.00n & 1.00p)
  g12 (1.00c, 1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  sx130is (1.01d & 1.01f)
  ixus310hs (1.00a & 1.01a)
  sx40hs (1.00d, 1.00g & 1.00i)
  g1x (1.00e, 1.00f & 1.00g)
  g5x (1.00c, 1.01a, 1.01b)
  g7x2 (1.01a, 1.01b, 1.10b)
*

Offline c10ud

  • ***
  • 245
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #48 on: 30 / March / 2012, 04:02:00 »
i've just seen that chdkde has a sx210 port while chdk hasn't, you might want to import that
Logged
*

Offline msl

  • *****
  • 1274
  • A720 IS, SX220 HS 1.01a
    • CHDK-DE links
Re: bringing chdkde and chdk back together discussion
« Reply #49 on: 30 / March / 2012, 04:58:22 »
Quote from: c10ud on 30 / March / 2012, 04:02:00
i've just seen that chdkde has a sx210 port while chdk hasn't, you might want to import that

The SX210 ist available: http://trac.assembla.com/chdk/browser/branches/release-1_0/platform/sx210is
Logged
CHDK-DE:  CHDK-DE links
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
« previous next »
 

Related Topics