Rik-4 wrote
> On 10/19/2015 04:00 PM, Michael Godfrey wrote:
>> Rik,
>>
>> I thought about the suggestion of enclosing the actual print call to
>> OpenGL
>> in visible, off ... visible, on... When I considered this it seemed like
>> overkill. But, now I wonder: is there any reason to have visible on while
>> the plot is being printed? If not, this could not only be a helpful fix
>> for 4.0.1, but it stay in for as long as it takes... It would still be
>> nice to
>> resolve the seg fault bug, but it is likely from what I have learned that
>> it is not entirely an Octave problem. I think that the bug report to
>> the OpenGL folks is still open.
>>
>> The full test should be:
>>
>> if (visible on}
>> visible off
>> actual print xxx
>> visible on
>> else
>> actual print xxx
>> endif
>>
>> Michael
>>
>
> Michael, and anyone else who knows more about the print bug,
>
> I think the issue is reversed. Isn't the problem that when the figure is
> invisible Octave goes through the OSMESA libraries, whereas when it is
> visible it goes through Gl2ps and is okay (at least no segfault). The big
> issue seems to be OpenGL and patches on Windows systems. There are more
> than four bug reports about crashes of the plot system on Windows
> platforms
> that usually only involve clicking on a plot with a patch object.
>
> --Rik
Hi,
@Michael:
Offscreen printing only works on some linux machines (those that don't use
proprietary drivers) so I would not recommend to do this change until we
find a way to have it work on most platforms.
@Rik: Can you point to those bugs on windows?
Also, gl2ps_print is called in both situations, either with an OpenGL
context/feedback buffer provided by OSMesa (in case "visible", "off") either
by Qt/FLTK (which use the default installed openGL driver/library depending
on the platform).
Pantxo
--
View this message in context: http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/error-doesn-t-return-to-debug-prompt-tp4672950p4673012.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.