Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

automatically configure wit & wwt #4

Open
GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Oct 12, 2015 · 1 comment
Open

automatically configure wit & wwt #4

GoogleCodeExporter opened this issue Oct 12, 2015 · 1 comment

Comments

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link

Attached is a patch that attempts to automatically configure wit & wwt paths in 
runtime.
This should make the application work better "out of the box" in a Linux 
environment.

I dont know if thats a good approach, perhaps values should only be set if the 
values are not already set in the ini file.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by martin.j...@gmail.com on 1 Mar 2011 at 10:43

Attachments:

@GoogleCodeExporter
Copy link
Author

im reluctant to include this patch.  i like the idea.  but there are a few 
things the patch seems that it would break.

first, it is linux only.  it could be fixed with a #ifdef.  im not sure of the 
wit default install location for mac.  and im not sure if there even is a 
install location for windows.

second, and more importantly, your patch completely ignores any user applied 
setting.  every time the program is started, it will check if "/usr/.../wit" 
exists.  and if it does, it will use it.  even if the user specifies a 
different location in the settings, next time the program starts, their setting 
will be reset back to "/usr/.../wit".  

i like to specify different paths for wit especially when wiimms comes out with 
a new version or when testing for bugs.  several times in teh past, a new 
version of wit comes out with different text formatting and breaks this 
program.  and many times i see something that does seem quite right in wit, so 
i build it with debug flags or with a bunch of added printf() to track 
something down.  your patch seems that it would destroy both of those. :(

if you can fix these things then i will add your patch.

Original comment by giantpune@gmail.com on 4 May 2011 at 5:16

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant