Puppy Linux Discussion Forum

[technosaurus]

Here is the patch:

Use

[muggins]

Uploaded v9.8.1( with technosaurus's patch).

Technosaurus, I can't comment on viewnor as I haven't really used it...what are your impressions? Also, did you convey your patch to the developer, as he may be interested? Lastly, where did you dig up those g++ compile optimisations, as they certainly do make a diff?

[technosaurus]

The optimizations are just regular size related optimizations (or speed that doesn't add size) from the gcc documentation - mostly referenced for embedded applications elsewhere, but Puppy is basically embedded x86.

I did send the patch in - the dev liked the idea but wants to do something different... give the warning once when any editing of the image is done. Unfortunately I didn't study the code enough to even attempt to help out with that. If I were going to put that much time into the code I would try to patch it to use libexif instead. Oh well - until then - the patch works for my needs.

Viewnior is the defaultimageviewer in Puppy 4.3.X and development has pretty much stopped. Although it is a nice viewer, it seems like Fotoxx would be a good option for smaller puplets to replace mtpaint and viewnior as both the viewer and editor.

[muggins]

Thanks technosaurus. I've uploaded v9.9.

[technosaurus]

I am impressed - here is the latest changelog - that was fast

[ttuuxxx]

The only 2 things I don't like about Fotoxx is that it doesn't batch resize, now that would e a feature and a half, and also when it displays transparent png backgrounds on icons, the background is 100% solid BLACK!!, it should be transparent.
ttuuxxx

bellow is a example fotoxx 9.8.1 VS gpicview , look at the background
also muggins your fotoxx 9.8.1 worked on 2.14x, but 9.9 has a glibC issue and won't run, did you compile it differently? strange that it didn't complain before and now it does.
/usr/bin/fotoxx: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.9' not found (required by /usr/bin/fotoxx) <-- V9.9


and when I run the older one you packaged and works fine other than transparencies , I get
sh-3.00# /usr/bin/fotoxx
fotoxx v.9.8.1 2010.03.22
language: en_US
using 1 threads
exiftool sh: exiftool: command not found
xdg-open 1.0.1
sh: ufraw: command not found
sh: exiftool: command not found
exif_get failed


ttuuxxx

[muggins]

Yes, I did compile it differently, using Technosaurus's g++ switches. Funnily though, the fotoxx-9.9.pet package was 3k bigger than if I just used Kornelix's Make. Anyway, I've recompiled using the latter, and re-uploaded...see if that works.

Regarding transparency issue...maybe contact the developer?

[ttuuxxx]

sorry muggins it didn't work, I'll just upload it here for safe keeping for others who have a glibc version issue.
ttuuxxx

[technosaurus]

which set of flags did you use? the bottom set was just a reference base on the standard set - the top set is better for size

Edit - the *sections flags are unnecessary now that freeimage is no longer a dependency - those just helped to eliminate unused sections when compiling against static libfreeimage (but it will make code slightly larger, so it is a gamble as to when to use and when not to)

[muggins]

technosaurus:

yes, I used the top set.

ttuxxx:

I tried compiling on p216, which I think has same kernel as p214, but
no luck. Some of the function calls, that fotoxx-9.9 has, don't seem
to be covered by available libs on p216. Or at least AFAIK.

[technosaurus]

now that we don't need libfreeimage, this would be better:

[muggins]

Uploaded v10.0.

Yes Technosaurus, you're right, it does compile smaller with the above flags, cheers.

[ttuuxxx]

lol here's muggins latest with a new folder icon and I removed the locals and docs, much nicer size, works on quirky
ttuuxxx

[technosaurus]

it contains docs and locales, the binary is only 122kb

[ttuuxxx]