Python-Ogre 1.0 RC1 Available

The first release candidate for Python-Ogre 1.0 is now available.

Please visit the [b]Python-Ogre[/b] web site for complete release information and download details.

In summary this release:

1. * Has a complete Windows installer (one download with everything for Python 2.4 and 2.5)
   * Is built on the Ogre release 1.4 source code
   * Has documentation in Windows help format (html available as well)
   * Further extensions to property handling
   * General bug fixes and enhancements[/list:u]
   As always we hope that it's bug free, and it's not so please report any issues/problems and we'll solve them as quickly as possible
   
   Thanks
   Python-Ogre Development Team

Congratulation to Python-Ogre Team!


Kind regards,
Broken_Sword.

Yeah. Bohhhravo!!!

congratulations and (as andy usually says) cheers to python-ogre and the python-ogre team!!!! this one's definitely a huge milestone!

I think the build dependencies are a unacceptable painfull to be built on a recent Linux installation, if you don't want to turn your standard (by distribution) and stable development environment into dust.

Many distributions deliver non CVS versions of the tools needed which collide with your build dependencies and instructions.

Why don't you release a binary release for Linux too? As i understood Py++ and the stuff used by python-ogre the python binding, the result is just a python-module specialized for a specific native library version.

Did i miss something or is noone trying to use this on linux?

What you missed was the fact that it is possible to install all the needed CVS libraries in such a way that they cause no trouble with the rest of your system and no need to upgrade to an unstable version of your distro.

Setup somewhere in your home directory like '/home/me/python-ogre/local', then with every package you build tell it to install to that directory. With autoconf based projects this is done with a "--prefix=/home/me/python-ogre/local" option when you run the configure script. Now you just have to make sure that you set up all your include and library paths to reference this new directory and make sure it shows up first on you LD_LIBRARY_PATH and PKG_CONFIG_PATH when ever you are building/running python-ogre based code. See the build directions for each package on how to add unconventional directories to there header and library search paths.

Python-Ogre also wrappers more libraries then a normal user needs. You don't need OgreODE, ODE, and OgreNewt. To start your game you probably won't need anything but Ogre, CEGUI, and OIS.

I don't know if we have many active Linux users (there are many trying). I was one of the first to get it running on Linux, but my real life caused me to fall behind the upgrade cycle, which used to be quite steep, before the Ogre 1.4 release. Now that we aren't targeting CVS ogre anymore, the dependencies are easier to handle.

I didn't miss those facts at all, but i think is that all those dependencies are a bit too much, while you could simply publish the resulting (plain) python module.

When someone does not need/use Newton for example, she/he simply does not have the needed native library. All you need is to specify which exact version you would need (maybe a problem with CVS/SVN versions).

The point I was trying to make is that is completely possible to build Python-Ogre and *not* turn you system into dust, its just takes time and patience. Current if you just want Ogre all you need to is a CVS version boost with a patched version of Boost.Python, GCC-XML and Ogre 1.4. Hopefully I, or one of the other Linux users, will get some time to make a more detailed guide on how to build python-ogre on Linux.

Also, I will see what I can do about a release its just that right now the Ogre module for python is around 94MB (thats after 'strip -s' and with '-Os') so it makes releases a bit cumbersome. When Python-Ogre hits 1.0 final I should at least be able to get modules out for Ubuntu systems.

EDIT: meant *not* turn your ...

I've been trying to get python-ogre to work on Linux, but I must agree completely with Caruso on this. Maybe Debian and apt-get have softened me, but after quite a few hours I've had enough of all the problems with the various CVS/SVN-versions of the dependancies and am back trying PyOgre.

I'll upgrade to python-ogre when it gets more mature, or when there is a proper release.

@Game_Ender: The part 'turn your system into' dust was not my real point, the one about the complexity and duration of the build process and its dependencies, was it. Sorry if i didn't get it on the point.

How are you going to provide Ubuntu packages? That would mean a lot of packaging! python-ogre depends on CVS versions of some packages also provided by the standard Ubuntu APT-sources (e.g. libode, libogre, libcegui).

I don't want to talk things down, but that seems to be a lot of work, keeping in mind that it would never be nearly official or get any official respect. Ubuntu has a strict policy to build its packages. It forbids things like CVS-version build dependencies instead of using those provided by the used Ubuntu version.
Isn't there another way around this problem?

Couldn' you just post the resulting source code of the generated python bindings? From that moment everyone could build the needed modules for its own. Only using those libraries interested in.

Well people are there are many people who just "want binaries" I agree that is kind of infeasible but if people really want them I will try. I was thinking about providing the generated source instead and this is a possible option. I don't see why it shouldn't work out, but you still need the CVS version of boost.

I've been trying to get python-ogre to work on Linux, but I must agree completely with Caruso on this. Maybe Debian and apt-get have softened me, but after quite a few hours I've had enough of all the problems with the various CVS/SVN-versions of the dependancies and am back trying PyOgre.

I'll upgrade to python-ogre when it gets more mature, or when there is a proper release.

I suggest you to write a mail, which describes the problem you had. Without it, we will not know what went wrong on your machine, Also if you an experienced Linux user, I invite you to contribute your knowledge to the project. We will appreciate any help.

How can i obtain the sources of version of 1.0 RC1 from SVN? I can't find any tags which would make it possible.

By the nature of the way Python-Ogre is built there aren't "sources" in the SVN - mearly the tools to create them (from the C++ libraries) and compile them..

Having said that the SVN is stable at the moment and I'd suggest that the 'latest' version is best..

Cheers
Andy

ps Rev 260 was the RC1 release, but don't post any bug reports against it as there have already been improvments..

I use linux primarily (Ubuntu Feisty, currently stable) and have been using Linux (mostly Debian) primarily for several years, now. I really hate having to reboot into windows to get python-ogre working, but my impression, after a lot of crap getting all the unstable dependencies to work together, is that it's not really ready, so I started looking at Axiom (compile once, run everywhere.)

I love python, I love linux, and I love ogre, I feel like these are a perfect combo, if I could just get them all in the same boat. I used that script that (I think Game_Ender made, I'm not sure) made to build it all in ~/ and it bombed on the boost stuff. I started having flashbacks to the several times before that I tried, and failed, to build it, and gave up.

I agree with Caruso, why not release a generated source-code package for us linux people? I don't want binaries, really (although that would be better than nothing, which is what I have now.) I'd most like to have a set of source files that aren't super dependent on unstable, works one-day, doesn't the next, moving targets. I'm ok with it being out-dated, or not having the newest Ogre features, as long as it works on Linux and Mac, I'm happy.

If you tried using the ogre_cvs.sh script and it failed could you let me know what the error was as I've run it a number of times on a clean Utunbu system without any problems and the intention is to make it work for everyone

For example if Boost failed then making a source release won't help (as you need a newer version of Boost than is currently 'packaged').

Cheers
Andy

ps. Using the google groups mailing list might be best to get 'quick' help on building for linux..