RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Problem with contours loading Groucho2.xar

["Phil Martin" <Phil@xxxxxxxx>]

Hi Gavin,

Do you see the bug when LX is using a CDraw that you've built yourself?
Either with or without the P4 flag?

Phil 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gavin Theobald
> Sent: 27 June 2006 17:37
> To: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Problem with contours loading 
> Groucho2.xar
> 
> Err... That doesn't make sense. The addition of the pentium4 
> flag was my mistake. I hadn't meant to check in that change. 
> Hence Luke removed the flag. So older versions of CDraw 
> didn't use the flag either, but these worked. It sounds to me 
> like some files haven't been rebuilt after the removal of the 
> flag, but I suspect that is unlikely.
> 
> The only code that relied on the flag was code that has now 
> been removed and has nothing to do with path contouring anyway.
> 
> Gavin
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gerry Iles
> Sent: 27 June 2006 16:45
> To: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Problem with contours loading 
> Groucho2.xar
> 
> Well, it turns out that r1354 works and r1355 doesn't.  r1355 
> was just a new build of the CDraw library that didn't use the 
> march=pentium4 flag but was otherwise built from the same 
> source as the version added in r1342.
> 
> It would appear that there is something in the r61 CDraw 
> update that doesn't work correctly on x86 unless 
> march=pentium4 is specified.
> 
> This does explain why x86_64 builds don't show the same problem.
> 
> Gerry
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alex Bligh
> Sent: 27 June 2006 13:24
> To: dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Alex Bligh
> Subject: RE: [XaraXtreme-dev] Problem with contours loading 
> Groucho2.xar
> 
> 
> 
> --On 27 June 2006 13:01 +0100 Phil Martin <Phil@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > This sounds like exactly the same bug as BZ1192 which also only
> appeared
> > recently and whose sample doc worked when loaded into a 
> version of LX 
> > that had RGB/BGR issues (not sure which version).
> >
> > I haven't got very far with it yet, except to ask Gavin and Gavin 
> > suggests LX is passing CDraw bad data.
> 
> It does sound like the same issue: I can replicate BZ1192 on 
> i386 debug and not x86_64 debug, just like Gerry's problem.
> 
> I can't see it's likely to be /caused/ by RGB/BGR swap though 
> - just a contemporaneous change.
> 
> Alex
>