Java3D

Dusty · 2004-01-27 21:30:41

I don't know if there is any reason to request this as a package; I'm more interested in knowing if I should try to create a package for Java3D, or just install it from the installer.

The only Java3D implementation I know of is available from blackdown. It comes as a .bin that runs an installer. I can't find any clear licencing information on it.

I believe the installer basically just copies some jars into the JAVA_HOME directory, in the lib/ext dir. Is there any reason to create a package to do this, or should I just run the installer and let it sit?

I have two reasons for asking; the first is that I don't know if not creating a package will cause pacman to choke when it comes time to upgrade j2sdk and j2re. Second, I doubt there is much interest in a Java3D package; I could attempt to make one publicly available, but if there's no interest, is there any reason that I should not just run the installer and have it installed.

I have a headache and feel lke I'm not making as much sense as I should be... strange.

Dusty

dp · 2004-01-27 22:36:32

i built a pkg for jdom ... mainly because i needed it and it has the advantage to be easily removed/upgraded and handles easy install on other machines if you install it again for arch

well jdom comes with the sourcecode, so it can be built while pkging -> no .bin file to mess around --- this is a difference

java3d is for sure interesting ... and if i find some time, i'll have a look at it ... but as i have exams at the uni in the next time, this having a look at java3d will be not before May :-)

=> if you build a pkg, it will be not worthless

Dusty · 2004-01-28 02:48:08

Ha. Most everything I do is worthless. I swear, I haven't even achieved immortality yet! :-D

Having said that, I'm going to give this package a shot. I think I can base it on the j2sdk and j2re packages. This should probably be moved to the mkpkg discussion.

I have a problem though. The dependencies are kind of screwy. This from the J3D readme:

This version of Java 3D(TM) for Linux requires the following:

  * Java 2 Runtime or SDK version 1.4.1 or later from Blackdown
    (http://www.blackdown.org/) or Sun Microsystems
    (http://java.sun.com/j2se/).

  * XFree86 4.1 or later with 

        XFree86's Mesa library and DRI

    or

        the NVidia driver 1.0.4191 or later

    or

        the ATI Fire GL2/3/4 drivers X4.1.0-1.9.16 or later
            (In order to get hardware acceleration withe Fire GL2/3/4
            driver you have to set LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libGL.so before
            starting Java 3D applications.
            E.g. "LD_PRELOAD=/usr/lib/libGL.so java HelloUniverse"
            According to ATI this problem is fixed in the 1.9.19 driver.)

    or

        an official (ie. not XFree86's) Mesa library
            (http://www.mesa3d.org/) if you can't or don't want to use DRI


  Note that XFree86 4.1 with XFree86's Mesa library without DRI is not 
  supported at this time!  Most likely the XServer will crash when you
  close Java3D application with that setup.

I want to use NVidia's drivers, for the record.

Does the xfree86 that comes with arch use DRI; I don't know what that is. Is there another package I can depend on that has DRI? I'd like to avoid having to download mesa or the like when most people will be using the NVidia or ATI drivers. (You need hardware acceleration for it to be useful).

In other words, can I just depend on j2re and xfree86, or do I need to depend on something else as well, to satisfy one the dependencies outlined above?

:?

Thanks,
Dusty

andy · 2004-01-28 09:46:37

DRI is hardware connected. If your hardware has no (decent) 3D acceleration then there is no package that can fulfil that requirement. Well, excpet the officical Mesa package as the docs tell you.

Now ... for starters I would ignore these 3D dependencies. I guess a good way wuld be to use the install script to give out a message that tells the admin, you need either DRI enabled or install the Mesa package.

But double check how well the official Mesa libs go along with Xfree - I remember some posts about that here in the forum and/or bugtracker.

Last, note, the README appears to be rather old. Xfree4.1 is really old - Arch has Xfree4.3. It may well be that the Mesa in xfree4.3 is better ... maybe the Java3D site can tell you more about that.

Arielext · 2004-01-28 20:31:58

Java 3D 1.3 is a bit old, but the development of it is rather slow (or they stopped, heard a rumor that they were planning that soon)

J3D is installed in the jre directory of the j2sdk or the top directory of the jre, so again you have to choose if you want the j3dre or j3dsdk. I for one have the j3dsdk but that's because I've build some programs with it and still like playling around with 3d audio in Linux. (I know about open AL but my c(++) skills are even worse than my english skills)

Dusty · 2004-01-28 21:14:11

No, 1.3.1 is the latest version of Java3D, which is what blackdown has.

I hadn't heard they were stopping development; do you mean Sun is, or just Blackdown? I can't find much info on J3D on java.sun.com anymore; did they take it out for lack of support?

Edit:

2. What is the future of Java 3D?

Right now, it is in a holding pattern. In July 2003, Sun sacked the two remaining fulltime developers and have no plans to replace them. There is no development being done, nor bug fixes that we are aware of, neither are they actively marketing it at conferences (instead pushing the JOGL project). Bugs are being registered and the the official mailing list is still going. For comparison, the same thing happened to JSDT in late 1998, and there is still no progress or change with no developer, no active participation nor any signs that Sun will formally announce that It's Dead Jim. If you are looking to start new projects, we can't recommend you use Java3D as it's future is so uncertain.

*sigh*
Dusty

gumbo · 2004-01-29 03:54:39

Xith3D

That is aiming to be a replacement J3D renderer, supporting nearly the same interfaces/classes/etc with a major difference - only floats are support, none of this double crap that isn't necessary anyway.

I haven't looked at it in a while - perhaps now behaviors and other critical things are implemented - it is getting quite a lot of development now that J3D is officially on hold. Considering that several of the lead developers were fired/moved to other projects, I consider it highly unlikely anything new will be released.

A package of Xith3D would be worth something, but IMO J3D's installer does most of the work a package is for (providing precompiled binaries and doing configs) anyway.[/url]

Dusty · 2004-01-29 16:17:09

Thanks very much for that info. I'm going to get into that after I graduate. Right now, I've got two J3D projects on the go that I better get finished before exploring a new API.

I won't bother making a J3D package. I might get an Xith3D package up if it hasn't been done by the time I get around to using it.

Dusty

gumbo · 2004-01-30 21:34:00

Dusty wrote:

Thanks very much for that info. I'm going to get into that after I graduate. Right now, I've got two J3D projects on the go that I better get finished before exploring a new API.

That's the beauty of the Xith design though - there is no new API. It is designed, as much as possible, to be a drop in replacement for J3D, with some new features if you feel like using them. Apart from the float/double thing, I can take my terrain renderer written for J3D, change a few lines of setup code, and run it under Xith.

Arch Linux

#1 2004-01-27 21:30:41

Java3D

#2 2004-01-27 22:36:32

Re: Java3D

#3 2004-01-28 02:48:08

Re: Java3D

#4 2004-01-28 09:46:37

Re: Java3D

#5 2004-01-28 20:31:58

Re: Java3D

#6 2004-01-28 21:14:11

Re: Java3D

#7 2004-01-29 03:54:39

Re: Java3D

#8 2004-01-29 16:17:09

Re: Java3D

#9 2004-01-30 21:34:00

Re: Java3D

Board footer