Win32 Executable from SVN

[chris]

I know that people have built 64-bit versions of Celestia for Linux. There were a couple bugs that needed to be fixed in order to make it work, but nothing too drastic needed to be done. It should be possible to build a 64-bit version of Celestia for Windows with little to no modification required. I haven't tried it yet because I'm still running 32-bit WinXP.

I know a few calculations that will run considerably faster with 64-bit code. But, Celestia spends most of its time doing floating point calculations, which I don't believe will be helped by a move to 64-bit.

--Chris

[cartrite]

I know that people have built 64-bit versions of Celestia for Linux. There were a couple bugs that needed to be fixed in order to make it work, but nothing too drastic needed to be done. It should be possible to build a 64-bit version of Celestia for Windows with little to no modification required. I haven't tried it yet because I'm still running 32-bit WinXP.

I know a few calculations that will run considerably faster with 64-bit code. But, Celestia spends most of its time doing floating point calculations, which I don't believe will be helped by a move to 64-bit.

--Chris

Chris,
So my linux system is actually generating 64 bit code? I thought that there would have to be 64 bit source code to do this. Code that is specifically written for 64 bit processors. But I guess this is wrong?
cartrite

[chris]

I know that people have built 64-bit versions of Celestia for Linux. There were a couple bugs that needed to be fixed in order to make it work, but nothing too drastic needed to be done. It should be possible to build a 64-bit version of Celestia for Windows with little to no modification required. I haven't tried it yet because I'm still running 32-bit WinXP.

I know a few calculations that will run considerably faster with 64-bit code. But, Celestia spends most of its time doing floating point calculations, which I don't believe will be helped by a move to 64-bit.

--Chris

Chris,
So my linux system is actually generating 64 bit code? I thought that there would have to be 64 bit source code to do this. Code that is specifically written for 64 bit processors. But I guess this is wrong?
cartrite

It could be, but it depends on what compiler options are set. There's no need for specific 64-bit code in a C++ program. There can be some portability issues for programs that assume that the size of a pointer is the size of an integer. This is typically true on 32-bit systems, but on a 64-bit system a pointer will be 64-bits, even though the 'normal' integer size may remain 32-bits.

--Chris

[cartrite]

I never really added any extra cxxflags but configure always reported an arch = x86_64. From what I just read, this seems to turn on the -m64 flag and all of it's associated defaults. So I guess Linux is building a 64 bit version of Celestia.
cartrite

[cartrite]

I have removed the index pages from my site at cartrite.cedhost.com . I was using Firefox today and when I went to the site, it was reported as dangerous and a forgery. It also warned that it solicits information. I do not, never will, never have, solicited information from a visitor to download anything at my site. There are some adds at the bottom of every page that I never checked out. I'm not sure if they solicit information or not. This site will be down indefinitely depending on what I can find out about the adds that the web host is putting on my pages. They are not part of my web site but may be required by the web host because it is free. If this is the case and these adds are a phishing scam, this site will be down permanently.
My web icon here still links to my old site and that contains no adds. That will be the only place to download the svn version of Celestia.

cartrite

[Reiko]

I don't remember ever seeing any adds.

[cartrite]

The warnings from Firefox disappeared when I go to the new site. I never did receive a reply informing me what the warnings were all about. I logged in and there was zero traffic at the site the last few days so I'm not going to bother updating that site with the svn executable. I did update the older site to version 4538. It contains a bug fix for eclipse rendering at high zoom.
cartrite

[BobHegwood]

The warnings from Firefox disappeared when I go to the new site. I never did receive a reply informing me what the warnings were all about. I logged in and there was zero traffic at the site the last few days so I'm not going to bother updating that site with the svn executable. I did update the older site to version 4538. It contains a bug fix for eclipse rendering at high zoom.
cartrite

Steve,

Just wanted to confirm that the new site is much more secure it seems.
Just wanted to ask you though... Your text says that the executables require Celestia 1.5.1 or some such.
I have always used your updates with 1.6.0 Pre whatever. Shouldn't your instructions reflect the fact
that the updates are, in fact, used only for the Celestia Pre-1.6 version environment?

Just FYI...

As always, thanks for the updates.

[cartrite]

I didn't know that a 1.6.0pre was released. Where did you get it from?
cartrite

[Reiko]

The warnings from Firefox disappeared when I go to the new site. I never did receive a reply informing me what the warnings were all about. I logged in and there was zero traffic at the site the last few days so I'm not going to bother updating that site with the svn executable. I did update the older site to version 4538. It contains a bug fix for eclipse rendering at high zoom.
cartrite

Steve,

Just wanted to confirm that the new site is much more secure it seems.
Just wanted to ask you though... Your text says that the executables require Celestia 1.5.1 or some such.
I have always used your updates with 1.6.0 Pre whatever. Shouldn't your instructions reflect the fact
that the updates are, in fact, used only for the Celestia Pre-1.6 version environment?

Just FYI...

As always, thanks for the updates.

I've always used them with 1.5.0 or 1.5.1 and never have seen a 1.6.0-pre. It wasn't until the SVN 4533 update that I have ever seen 1.6.0 show during load up.

[BobHegwood]

I didn't know that a 1.6.0pre was released. Where did you get it from?
cartrite

Whatever do you mean?
The very latest SVN download I got from YOUR site (celestia-svn-r4538.zip) is itself
a pre-release of 1.6...

When the program starts up, you'll see the Celestia Splash screen which states:
"Celestia Version 1.6.0"

This has been the case for almost ALL of the SVN versions I have been getting from your site.
Am I really THAT Brain-Dead? In this case, methinks NOT.

At any rate, I do really appreciate the service, so sorry for the confusion here.
Thanks, Bob

EDIT:
My confusion here probably stems from the fact that I maintain a stable version (1.5.1 Final)
on my PC, along side the latest SVN version (which I have always just assumed was a Pre 1.6.0
version.)
In fact, with the configuration file changes, and some of the new shaders involved, I simply
thought that ALL of the SVN updates were Pre 1.6.0 versions. Does that help clarify?

[cartrite]

In my read me files, I say that a 1.5 .0 or 1.5.1 version needs to be installed. Then the executable that I provide replaces the executable that came with the 1.5 installation.

I also mentioned that celestia.cfg has to be modified after Fridger's Globular Cluster addition. I even supplied a few shader files for HDR to work. But I don't supply all the files that changed in the folders like textures, data, models, locale, etc. There is even new folder called the extras-standard folder. That would all come with a 1.6.0pre release. That is what I thought you meant.

I'm starting to wonder when the executables will stop working with a 1.5 installation.

If you download the svn celestia folder and place the executable in that folder along with the dll files, that will probably work too. Then you have a virtual 1.6.0pre. But that is up to the user to do that. I don't supply instructions to do this because there are too many things that can go wrong.

I maintain my 1.5.1 installation on Windows to test the executables briefly before I upload them.

cartrite

[BobHegwood]

Sorry Steve...
Just confusion concerning terminology I suppose.
I have considered everything after 1.5.1 Final as being Pre 1.6 releases.

Thanks, Bob

[cartrite]

Sorry Steve...
Just confusion concerning terminology I suppose.
I have considered everything after 1.5.1 Final as being Pre 1.6 releases.

Thanks, Bob

Actually, I wouldn't call the svn version a pre release either. The svn version, the entire svn version, is constantly changing as the code and support files are modified or new files are added and old files are deleted. So the svn version is the svn version. A prerelease will be the svn version when it is ready for prerelease and the changes to it after that will be minimal between the prereleases until the final release. Then, hopefully, everything will start over again and move towards a 1.7 version.
Hope I got that right.
cartrite

[chris]

To clear this up a little bit...

"Prereleases" as we had for 1.5.0 and before are no longer happening. These prereleases were simply snapshots of Celestia in development, and SVN builds from cartwrite and others have taken their place.

There will be a release candidate ready before the final version of 1.6.0. This will be very close to the final version of Celestia 1.6.0; in fact, if no serious bugs are reported in the release candidate, it will become Celestia 1.6.0 final.

--Chris

[BobHegwood]

Steve?

I think we just ran into the wall with using the 1.5.1 environment for the execution of
the 1.6 "pre-releases."

The latest download I got (SVN 4560) no longer works correctly.
After looking t the SSC file "solarsys.ssc" it looks to me as if there are
errors in the file.

Again, to me it looks as if some of the AltSurface declarations are simply
either screwed up, or they are not being processed correctly by this version
of Celestia.

I tried to get it to work at my end, but have been unsuccessful thus far.
Just FYI...

Thanks, Brain-Dead

[Derek]

Bob,

I've just downloaded 4560 and all my altsurfaces are working OK. Question why would your solarsys.ssc change just because you updated to 4560?

[BobHegwood]

Bob,

I've just downloaded 4560 and all my altsurfaces are working OK. Question why would your solarsys.ssc change just because you updated to 4560?

Yes, I understand...
Apparently, my damned, new 64-bit Vista installation decided to eat my Celestia when I tried
to update using the latest SVN version. Honestly, I dunno what happened.

Beware 64-bit Vista...
I thought that it would work the same way my 32-bit system did, but I was sadly
mistaken. By the time I figure it out, I'll be dead.

Thanks for the help Derek. Much appreciated.

EDIT:
Just for everyone's information here, I had to re-install Celestia 1.5.1
in order to get it working again. I really have *NO* idea what happened
with this stupid machine. (Or, maybe this stupid user)

Thanks again, Brain-Dead

[cartrite]

It sounds like you may have edited your solarsys.ssc file and corrupted it somehow. There was not much of a change between 4559 and 4560. Only one character. 1 line of code had a "<" and it was changed to "=<". That's it.

In fact most of the changes recently didn't even affect the executable. When something changes in the .po files or files in the data folder, there is no change in the actual executable but the revision number still changes. That is why there are sometimes large differences between version numbers. I don't rebuild it unless there is actual executable code that changed.
cartrite

[BobHegwood]

It sounds like you may have edited your solarsys.ssc file and corrupted it somehow. There was not much of a change between 4559 and 4560. Only one character. 1 line of code had a "<" and it was changed to "=<". That's it.

That's the thing, though...
I did NOT edit the solarsys.ssc file, and I still have absolutely no idea what
happened to it.

No problem though. Thanks Steve.