You are not logged in.
Hello, I would like to fix the gimp-gap PKGBUILD.
make -j1
comes out with
libavfilter/libmpcodecs/vf_screenshot.c:137:29: error: passing argument 2 of ‘sws_scale’ from incompatible pointer type [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
137 | sws_scale(priv->ctx, mpi->planes, mpi->stride, 0, priv->dh, dst, dst_stride);
| ~~~^~~~~~~~
| |
| unsigned char **
And the same error happens again after that passing "src" on line 160.
First thing: I couldn't get any documentation to understand this and I can't even figure from where mpi comes out.
Second (and maybe more important: My version is still working, but the source is abandoned, there is no official source and as long as I know the person that made this is impossible to found out (email seems to have been deleted or something like that). There is still sense in fixing this?
What I mean is, the code could be ported on github and made work (if there is a fix), but wouldn't this be like *stolen*?
Thank you in advance for your time and your patience
Offline
Please use the Report button and ask a moderator to move your post to AUR Issues, gimp-gap is not in extra.
As for your "stolen" concern: that all depends on the gimp-gap license. Assuming it's open-sourced properly, you can host its code elsewhere.
Offline
Mod note: moving to AUR Issues.
Sakura:-
Mobo: MSI MAG X570S TORPEDO MAX // Processor: AMD Ryzen 9 5950X @4.9GHz // GFX: AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT // RAM: 32GB (4x 8GB) Corsair DDR4 (@ 3000MHz) // Storage: 1x 3TB HDD, 6x 1TB SSD, 2x 120GB SSD, 1x 275GB M2 SSD
Making lemonade from lemons since 2015.
Offline
I apologize for my mistake.
However, as far as I know, the package should be under GPL version 3.
Offline
It looks like it's technically "GPL-2.0-or-later" so GPLv3 should be OK for modifications. It's bizarre they didn't have a LICENSE file in the repo, I just checked some of the .c files for the header. If you want to take it on and host it on Github, then the project should probably be forked + renamed to make sure people are not bothering the original devs. The license allows for that, as long as you don't modify the license on the existing files or re-license the project to an compatible license to GPLv2/3.
However, since this project was archived 6 years ago, I would just abandon the AUR package; trying to maintain it you're probably in for a lot of pain dealing with dependencies and compiler migration.
I couldn't find any obvious successor for gimp-gap, did GIMP simply abandon animations, or was it taken over by another project?
Offline
Have you checked it the functionality is present in the soon-to-be-released gimp 3 ?
Disliking systemd intensely, but not satisfied with alternatives so focusing on taming systemd.
clean chroot building not flexible enough ?
Try clean chroot manager by graysky
Online
I couldn't find any obvious successor for gimp-gap, did GIMP simply abandon animations, or was it taken over by another project?
I have no idea. I never heard of another project. I wrote half a dozen of people who worked in it, no one eve answered. It seems like they vanished.
Have you checked it the functionality is present in the soon-to-be-released gimp 3 ?
No idea. I have Gimp 2.10.38-5 and here it works. I would be tempted to copy all the *.mo files and make a package, but I think it would work only fo my architecture (x86_64)
Sad as it sounds, it really seems this is a dead end for it, at least if some documentation doesn't spawn out.
Offline
but I think it would work only fo my architecture (x86_64)
that shouldn't be an issue then, Arch Linux only supports x86_64 so that package should be good to go.
Offline
Maybe post on the GIMP extension forum. That forums looks active and you may get someone on the inside to comment on whether gimp-gap is a dead end, or replaced by a different plugin in v3. The release notes for v3 don't mention animations at all, but perhaps there's a plugin in the works for it?
If not, it could be a decent development project if you want to take it on and fork the original project. That's assuming you do not have to refactor the entire thing, of course; but, then again, if you're into that, there's nothing wrong with that either.
Offline
Maybe post on the GIMP extension forum.
Nice, I am doing it.
Offline
Truth is I have done it, but nothing came out (https://www.gimp-forum.net/Thread-Information-about-GAP).
What could be done would be to build the "package" with fakepkg, move it to github and downloads the single files as plugins.
I am not sure about what would happen when Gimp upgrades.
Offline
You fixed the build failure?
Offline
@loqs, no, I didn't. What I mean is that we can repackage it and I have asked around as suggested. I "could" try to fix it, but before that I need to understand myself what this pointer is about, and now I can't even get from which library it comes from. Sorry, I am a bit slow right now, it's a busy period
Offline
Maybe try adding `-fpermissive` to CFLAGS?
Offline