Re: [Tuxpaint-devel] the Sugar port

[Bill K. <nb...@so...>]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2007 at 03:03:50AM -0500, Albert Cahalan wrote:
> First of all, it runs.
> http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Tux_Paint

Awesome.  Is it worth mirroring the binary over on SF.net and adding an XO
page to the main TP website?  (I'd of course link to the wiki there, too.)


> I will need to fix the Makefile. Much breakage is likely;
> I hope that won't affect anybody.
<snip>

Well, ping us when you've committed something, so we can all test it.


<snip>
> Tux Paint has an excess of low-quality brushes, stamps,
> and magic tools. Perhaps a disinterested 3rd party should
> tell us what to throw away.

I'm happy leaving it to you to decide.


> Why is sysfonts off by default? I had **NO** fonts on
> the OLPC XO until I enabled sysfonts.

Tux Paint ships with a handful of fonts that (should, at least) work.
(The stuff in data/fonts/)

Why did the XO build not find them?


> The *.so files are bad. They aren't built with -fPIC or -fpic.
> Run-time relocation is required. At best, this will slow the
> start-up time and eat memory. On some SE Linux setups,
> Tux Paint will need special security-override markings just
> to run.

Adding -fpic via a Makefile variable.

Like I said, we can look into building them directly into Tux Paint itself,
as an option (which'd be a default for some platforms, like the XO).

-- 
-bill!
bi...@ne...
http://www.newbreedsoftware.com/