Hello,
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 4:58 AM, Olivier Nougarede
wrote:
> In an edc file, i have the following:
>
> group { name: "ok_img";
>min: 20 20;
>parts {
> part { name: "okimg";
> type: IMAGE;
> mouse_events: 1;
> description { state: "default" 0.0;
>
In an edc file, i have the following:
group { name: "ok_img";
min: 20 20;
parts {
part { name: "okimg";
type: IMAGE;
mouse_events: 1;
description { state: "default" 0.0;
image.normal: "ic_ok.png";
}
}
}
programs {
prog
On Fri, 18 Apr 2014 07:13:46 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 14:15:57 +0200 Stefan Schmidt
> said:
>
> > Hello.
> >
> > On Thu, 2014-04-17 at 20:52, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 07:24:53 -0400 Will Hopper
> > > said:
> > >
> > > > Than
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 16:18:19 -0400 Will Hopper said:
> Thanks for the info - and bullet *should* have those generic symlinks if
> the minor version have compatible features, but it doesn't! the only real
> file (other than docs) in the whole package is
> /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libBulletSoftB
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 14:15:57 +0200 Stefan Schmidt
said:
> Hello.
>
> On Thu, 2014-04-17 at 20:52, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 07:24:53 -0400 Will Hopper said:
> >
> > > Thanks for the info about compatible versions. I was guessing that it was
> > > because the files were ca
Thanks for the info - and bullet *should* have those generic symlinks if
the minor version have compatible features, but it doesn't! the only real
file (other than docs) in the whole package is
/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libBulletSoftBody.so.2.82. (and so on for
libBulletCollision, etc). So, thats
Hello.
On Thu, 2014-04-17 at 20:52, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 07:24:53 -0400 Will Hopper said:
>
> > Thanks for the info about compatible versions. I was guessing that it was
> > because the files were called libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and
> > libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and tha
On Thu, 17 Apr 2014 07:24:53 -0400 Will Hopper said:
> Thanks for the info about compatible versions. I was guessing that it was
> because the files were called libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and
> libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and that the hard coded version number was
> causing problems finding it. Anyw
Thanks for the info about compatible versions. I was guessing that it was
because the files were called libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and
libbulletsoftbody.so.2.81 and that the hard coded version number was
causing problems finding it. Anyway, I first looked around for the 2.81
debs online to downgrade
