Unofficial CyberGraphX v4 bug fixes

[Iggy]

@Cosmos

I can assure you categorically that A-EON has not abandoned Warp3D for Classic.

Frank Mariak has not abandoned CybergraphX.

Maybe you should not presume speak for Frank.
You have a much closer relationship with A-eon, so I suppose you might be familiar with their plans.

My friend Kronos, on the other hand, might have a better idea of what one of the best MorphOS developers might or might not do as he works within that group.

[Iggy]

QUOTE=Cosmos;792663]...  true Amiga fans don't want PCI, Radeon, Agp, PCIe and PowerPC...

PowerPC is PC in disguise, we don't want that crap... Open a PPC datasheet : all is wrong and non-sense into this CPU...[/QUOTE]

I AM a true Amiga fan.
Don't presume to talk for ME.
I WANT PPC (and maybe even X86, X86-64), PCI (and PCI-e), and I have Radeon and AGP.

I used to admire your hardware projects, but YOU and your opinions have seriously offended me.
And you come off sounding like a fool who is living in the past.

Also the library you want fixed was created in part by Frank Mariak, a advocate of the move to PPCs , a great MorphOS developer, and one of the best 3rd party developers for the Amiga during its twilight days.

Apparently you think you know better tha Frank AND a large part of the remaining community that wants to move forward.

[guest11527]

Hum... Karlos wrote on this forum he have the source of Warp3D : I sent an MP because I found a possible bug in the W3D_Picasso96MU.library in the function W3D_P96MU_AllocVMem. I fixed by myself, but absolutly not sure of my fix...

When I launched GLBlitzQuake just after a boot, I had planned fps. By cons, when I booted up another Warp3D program just before as Cow3D for example, then I was getting about 0.5 fps less with the same GLBlitzQuake...


I GOT AN ANSWER !! YES !!!

He said to me, he need an authorization to help me... And I'm still waiting since more than 1 year now...

If it's not a conspiracy, what is it ?

Have you ever worked in an enterprise? People are busy there, communications got lost. It's not because somebody wanted to act bad on you, it is just because the issue was lost. The answer is simple: Try again, be more persistent, try other means of communication. If, after two weeks, you do not get an answer, it does not mean that they don't want to fix the problem. It only means that the issue got lost because people are busy. This happened more than once to me.

I can tell you another story: I found a bug in the proprietary NVIDIA driver for the Linux kernel. As soon as I enabled panning, the screen was showing trash in the extended window area. I reported the bug to NVIDIA. I got a silly reply saying "I cannot reproduce the problem". I could reproduce it on four machines, with four different generations of NVIDIA cards.  

Hence, I checked carefully where the bug was coming from, going though the code and observing return codes, until I found a function returning wrong values, or seemingly wrong values. I communicated with mailing lists of the kernel and X11 folks, trying to understand whether I guessed correctly. And finally got contact with the developers, more by accident, because apparently the NVIDIA folks also read the intel-core developer mailing lists: Problem is that NVIDIA only implements xrandr 1.2, not xrandr 2.0, and their panning function is a hack on top of xrandr 1.2 which does not implement the xrandr 2.0 interface correctly.

Now, does that mean that NVIDIA has started a conspiracy to prevent people from using Linux? Not the least! It just means that this is a typical enterprise, with many many levels of responsibility between the "customer care" (people that are usually just technical expert enough to tell you how to install a graphics driver) and the actual developers. It also means that I used - apparently - a feature that is seldom required, and they simply didn't think of all the consequences clearly of instead implementing xrandr 2.0 cleanly rather use a proprietary xrandr 1.2 extension. No conspiracy here. Just the usual lazyness. Most folks have better things to do than to serve you and solve your personal problems...

Now in this case here, the story is much simpler: You *do* have the developer at your hands, you do not need to get through a "customer (we do not) care" "service simulation", but you can ask directly.

So now, once again: Why didn't you just make your life easier and wrote an email?

There is *still* enough time to get mad at people later, but certain things should be done in the right order. First ask. Then shoot.

Got it?

[donpalmera]

Have you ever worked in an enterprise?

You seem to just be trying to drag a ton of extra crap into your narrative to try to make it make sense in someway.
Most of the software the maybe a few hundred active 68k amiga users are using is basically abandon-ware. You keep going on about email authors blah blah blah. A lot of this stuff hasn't been touched in decades. Your example of a bug in a current piece of software that's under active development and in use by thousands and thousands of users adds nothing to your argument and just makes you look seriously out of touch with reality.
Who the hell is going to take time out of their day to chase user reported bugs in software they haven't worked on or even used in decades?

I see no problem with Cosmos doing what he does as long as he doesn't distribute copyrighted material. (@Cosmos; Release patches against official binaries instead of modified binaries...)

I think it says a lot about what remains of the "Amiga community" that instead of going over the technical aspects of what Cosmos has done you guys spend your time worrying about the moral implications of changing a few bytes in a file the original author has long since given up giving a about.

[Jose]

@Thomas Richter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYWzMvlj2RQ

[eliyahu]

@thread

whether or not it's ethical to modify commercial software for oneself is one thing. and documenting and/or distributing a binary patch may or may not be OK. but distributing (patched or otherwise) commercial software to which you do not have distribution rights is illegal in many jurisdictions, and linking to or posting such material on amiga.org is expressly against our terms of service. that's not a conspiracy -- that's the contract between the site and its members.

therefore anyone who attempts to distribute commercial software without permission from the software owner(s) -- whether in binary or in source or disassembled code forms -- will receive a vacation from the site.

@Cosmos

this isn't the first time you've done this. this is your final warning on the subject. don't do it here again.

-- eliyahu

[amigakit]

I have had an official statement from the copyright holders/developers of CybergraphX:

Even though some comments in this thread seem to imply it, the classic 68k
version of CyberGraphX4 has not been abandoned. Even though there has not
been any official update for quite some years, the software is still
maintained by it's original author and he can be contacted via
mail@cybergraphx.de.
Anyone else patching the software or releasing so called "new versions" does
so without permission of the original author and clearly disrespects the
respective copyright.

[stefcep2]

I have had an official statement from the copyright holders/developers of CybergraphX:

in what definition is the software being "maintained"?

[EvilGuy]

I think it says a lot about what remains of the "Amiga community" that instead of going over the technical aspects of what Cosmos has done you guys spend your time worrying about the moral implications

Yes, you are so right! Moral implications, pfft. Its not the Amiga way..

in what definition is the software being "maintained"?

In the definition that the creators of the software have said they still own it and they don't want unauthorised derivative works out there. Their software, their rules. Don't like it, write your own graphics drivers.

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

in what definition is the software being "maintained"?

If he "maintains" the software as well as he "maintains" his website:

[Trev]

Did Piru ever get permission to patch Exec, or do we conveniently ignore the transgressions of our more popular and prolific community members? ;-) (Does he still post here? I haven't been on much in the last four years....)

EDIT: But yeah, @Cosmos should have contacted the original author. I for one stopped fiddling with Amiga software because it stopped being fun. When I reported issues with e.g. the OS 4 SDK ages ago, they were ignored. :-( I suppose I should unload my kit. What does a Blizzard 1260 with SCSI adapter go for these days?

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

Did Piru ever get permission to patch Exec, or do we conveniently ignore the transgressions of our more popular and prolific community members? ;-) (Does he still post here? I haven't been on much in the last four years....)

EDIT: But yeah, @Cosmos should have contacted the original author. I for one stopped fiddling with Amiga software because it stopped being fun. When I reported issues with e.g. the OS 4 SDK ages ago, they were ignored. :-( I suppose I should unload my kit. What does a Blizzard 1260 with SCSI adapter go for these days?

I think he ragequit a few years ago, too.  Like most folks do when they get fed up with the bickering and trolling, lol.  

Here you go:  http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=702149&postcount=8

As for the Bliz 1260 + SCSI?  *a lot*.  

[LoadWB]

I think it says a lot about what remains of the "Amiga community" that instead of going over the technical aspects of what Cosmos has done you guys spend your time worrying about the moral implications of changing a few bytes in a file the original author has long since given up giving a about.

Indeed it does.  Every community, irrespective of size, is built upon the foundation of a civil society which requires a set of morals.  Without a stable set of morals the community cannot survive.

You are also making an unwarranted assumption as to the disposition of the author.

[giZmo350]

I think he ragequit a few years ago, too.  Like most folks do when they get fed up with the bickering and trolling, lol.  

Here you go:  http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=702149&postcount=8

As for the Bliz 1260 + SCSI?  *a lot*.  

Oh Man, I remember those days! :lol:

Me Piru, You Not!

[Minuous]

this isn't the first time you've done this. this is your final warning on the subject. don't do it here again.

Done what, exactly? I don't see him distributing anything here...And there's nothing wrong with distributing a patch to fix bugs in software, it's common practice, Aminet and other such repositories are full of such patches. CGX is obviously not being maintained, by definition, as the original coder is not performing any maintenance on it (ie. fixing known bugs) and the website has gone.

[Trev]

I think the point everyone is trying to make is if an Amiga developer--they're special, you see--opts not to support their software, there's f**k all anyone can do about it. ;-) This is true in enterprise environments as well, but it's understood and accepted that enterprises modify software in various ways to facilitate compatibility and interoperability. Behavior similar to SetPatch and SetFunction has existed in DOS and Windows for decades, for example.