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

[#1136] Add JOGL for macOS arm64 architecture - Fixes 3D support on macOS Silicon in Java 17 #1958

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jan 9, 2023

Conversation

SiboVG
Copy link
Member

@SiboVG SiboVG commented Jan 8, 2023

I was finally able to build JOGL on my system, using this JOGL fork for macOS arm64 architectures, and this gluegen fork.

Previously, you just got this error when running OR with Java 17:
image

Now you get a beautiful 3D render :)
image

This PR fixes #1136. I'd say this also fixes #1533 since the sluggishness is most noticeable on Apple Silicon devices.

Bad news: I have not noticed that noticed that upgrading JOGL solves any of the known macOS 3D issues though... But hey, at least people can now run it on Java 17.

I also have not been able to build JOGL for Windows a fix to #1364. I think you can only build JOGL for the OS that you're operating on, so I need to build JOGL on a Windows machine - which was not successful, I received a lot of errors.


Before merging, I'd like to ask @JoePfeiffer to verify whether updating the jogl-all.jar brought back issue #1156.

@JoePfeiffer
Copy link
Contributor

I'm sorry to say it does (I assume you mean running openrocket_build_1418 using Java 11). Same error message exactly.

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 8, 2023

I'm sorry to say it does (I assume you mean running openrocket_build_1418 using Java 11). Same error message exactly.

🥲

I suspected it would...

@SiboVG SiboVG marked this pull request as draft January 8, 2023 22:24
@SiboVG SiboVG marked this pull request as ready for review January 8, 2023 23:57
@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 8, 2023

Okay @JoePfeiffer could you check again?

@neilweinstock
Copy link
Contributor

If the only thing we get from that is the ability to distribute an ARM-native Mac build, then that is still a significant advantage and lightens the urgency of replacing JOGL a bit.

Should we do some testing of the Mac ARM build? If so then it would be good to have a full installer so we can test the whole thing properly.

@hcraigmiller
Copy link
Collaborator

Should we do some testing of the Mac ARM build? If so then it would be good to have a full installer so we can test the whole thing properly.

I agree, it would be nice to test the installers. But, before that, I think PR #1954 should be completed and both PR #1954 and #1955 merged.

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

If the only thing we get from that is the ability to distribute an ARM-native Mac build, then that is still a significant advantage and lightens the urgency of replacing JOGL a bit.

Should we do some testing of the Mac ARM build? If so then it would be good to have a full installer so we can test the whole thing properly.

Oh wow, didn't even think if that yet. I'll send you a build on Slack.

@JoePfeiffer
Copy link
Contributor

Okay @JoePfeiffer could you check again?

It works! This is outstanding -- so far as I'm concerned, if we can have JOGL for all of our architectures, we can kick replacing it down the road indefinitely.

@JoePfeiffer
Copy link
Contributor

Should we do some testing of the Mac ARM build? If so then it would be good to have a full installer so we can test the whole thing properly.

I agree, it would be nice to test the installers. But, before that, I think PR #1954 should be completed and both PR #1954 and #1955 merged.

Testing the installers doesn't require #1954 and #1955. We do want to merge them before final release, of course.

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

Testing the installers doesn't require #1954 and #1955. We do want to merge them before final release, of course.

No, but I'm a bit wary of needing to code-sign a bunch of test installers. At least for the macOS signing I know that they notarize the .dmg installer into a database. So I can image that they don't want every developer to clog their database with test installers. But I don't know, I'd have to research it to be sure.

@JoePfeiffer
Copy link
Contributor

Testing the installers doesn't require #1954 and #1955. We do want to merge them before final release, of course.

No, but I'm a bit wary of needing to code-sign a bunch of test installers. At least for the macOS signing I know that they notarize the .dmg installer into a database. So I can image that they don't want every developer to clog their database with test installers. But I don't know, I'd have to research it to be sure.

These are test installers, just for our use. Why sign them?

@neilweinstock
Copy link
Contributor

The main thing is just to test the full Mac ARM build, which I am doing now, and it's looking mighty good so far.

@neilweinstock
Copy link
Contributor

Should I recruit some Mac users on TRF to give it a good run-through, or do we trust just Sibo and me to do it?

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

Good thing there's ChatGPT to answer all my questions 😇
image

So what do you think, will we release more than 50 releases this year?

@JoePfeiffer
Copy link
Contributor

So what do you think, will we release more than 50 releases this year?

Depends, how's your stock of Red Bull?

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

Should I recruit some Mac users on TRF to give it a good run-through, or do we trust just Sibo and me to do it?

What I would really want is to recruit a couple of people who really know their way around OpenRocket to do some stress-testing with the final installer/release. To cope for not having a final beta release.

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

God I love ChatGPT!
image

@SiboVG
Copy link
Member Author

SiboVG commented Jan 9, 2023

Okay so there aren't really limits to creating the installers. I'll create some in the coming week for testing.

@SiboVG SiboVG changed the title Add JOGL for macOS arm64 architecture - Fixes 3D support on macOS Silicon in Java 17 [#1136] Add JOGL for macOS arm64 architecture - Fixes 3D support on macOS Silicon in Java 17 Jan 9, 2023
@SiboVG SiboVG merged commit 042e2ec into openrocket:unstable Jan 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Sluggish UI in V22.02 3D not working on Mac ARM packaged version
4 participants