 | | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) I sure wish I knew how to recreate this...... Kev (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) Sven, What might be better than sending a viewer app each time awould be send a person an LDR/MPD file and a link to a server running a viewer, perhaps an pared-down version of the java app mentioned in this post: (URL) That would definitely (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) Ldglite wouldn't be a good choice (for a packaged solution) -- it needs glut32.dll along with the main ldglite.exe file. But it would be a good choice for a program someone could just grab, unzip, and run. If you pointed them at the download. (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) Ldglite is still fairly primitive. For Windows, it's basically just an executable and a dll. If you don't give it an ldraw path, it should just look in the directory containing the model, and in the model file itself (if it's an MPD). Is that (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) Exactly this is my problem. It is hard to explain all this to someone who has never heard of LDRAW. What I imagine is something like a (*.zip?)package containing the model file, the parts and the viewer. You just have to send this package per (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed new meta-command: !STANDALONE_LDR
|
|
(...) This is a bit of a problem for me too. I've written scripts to import and export ldraw data from Blender, and naturally I built a model in Blender following that.. but now I'm not allowed to share the original Blender model without removing (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposed new meta-command: !STANDALONE_LDR
|
|
(...) They will. We haven't quite decided on what it will be but it will be there. -Orion (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Proposed new meta-command: !STANDALONE_LDR
|
|
I'd like to propose the creation of a new meta-command. It is as follows: 0 !STANDALONE_LDR The zero at the beginning of this command MUST be the first byte of the model file. LDraw viewing programs can look for the presence of this command at the (...) (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) I forgot to mention that the above programs will of course only work if he creates a directory somewhere that contains P and PARTS sub-directories, and then sets that as his LDraw directory in MLCad and/or LDGLite. --Travis (19 years ago, 9-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) I'd say your best bet for that is likely MLCAD or LDGLite. Not sure if LDGLite likes directories inside MPDs, but there's a reasonably good chance it will work. On a related note, have you tried using LDGLite or LDView as the renderer in LPub? (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: ldglite for Solaris 10 Install procedure
|
|
Yes one could do that. But as compilation is a one time thing and they would still have the distribution in case they mauled it, I didn't feel it necessary to do it that way. (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: ldglite for Solaris 10 Install procedure
|
|
(...) You should probably instead create a copy called makefile.solaris and make the changes in that. ROSCO (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
Hi Orion, Thank you! So I just need a good viewer for step-by-step instructions! Leg Godt -Sven (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDRAW Package format?
|
|
(...) Who said that? It's not specifically disallowed in the MPD spec and LDView/MLCad both work fine with s/ and 48/ in the file names. I just tested LDView by changing the LDRAW directory to an empty directory and used a self contained MPD file (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | LDRAW Package format?
|
|
Hi everybody, yesterday someone sent me an e-mail and asked for the instructions of one of my models. I asked myself: Shall I render all the steps of the instructions via LPub - which takes a long time? Or shall I just send him the mpd-file and a (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | ldglite for Solaris 10 Install procedure
|
|
ldglite for Solaris 10. Download and install OpenGL from the Sun Website :(URL) and install Glut from the Sun Website: (URL) ldglite from (URL) root (or other priveleged user) unzip ldglite in the directory of your choice (I use /opt and have the (...) (19 years ago, 8-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: ldglite Compilation concerns
|
|
(...) I'd say that <GL/osmesa.h> would normally be preferable, but "GL/osmesa.h" works fine, since double quotes in a #include statement search a full superset of the directories searched by angle brackets. So it should certainly not affect its (...) (19 years ago, 6-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: ldglite Compile fail
|
|
(...) Looks like gcc is getting pickier about function prototypes these days. Try adding this line near the top of hoser.c after the #include lines. void hoseout(void); (19 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | ldglite Compile fail
|
|
Ok, I know UNIX, but to be honest, I'm no programmer by a long shot So This error stopped me. gcc -g -DUNIX -DUSE_OPENGL -DUSE_L3_PARSER -DUSE_BMP8 -DNEED_MIN_MAX -DUSE_PNG -DTILE_RENDER_OPTION -DTEST_MUI_GUI -I./mui/include -c -o hoser.o hoser.c (...) (19 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | ldglite Compilation concerns
|
|
I seem to have found a typo in ldglpr.c : ---Begin ldglpr.c line 51--- #ifdef OSMESA_OPTION #include "GL/osmesa.h" void *OSbuffer = NULL; OSMesaContext ctx; #endif ---End ldglpr.c line 55--- Shouldn't that be <GL/osmesa.h> I may be submitting some (...) (19 years ago, 5-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - current status?
|
|
(...) No work is being done on this at the moment. I think I may be expected to submit an updated draft standard to the LSC on this topic. I will be quite busy in January and February (change of country+job), so it may take some time before I get (...) (19 years ago, 2-Jan-06, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC - current status?
|
|
(...) Steve, Tore, Lars, Orion ... any? w. (19 years ago, 29-Dec-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Art of Illusion
|
|
(...) Any news in this matter? I have been using AOI for a few years now and it's now a very nice and competent software, latest version 2.2 is impressive. :) A good and growing AOI forum: (URL) (19 years ago, 30-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Ldraw to Bricklink shopping list converter
|
|
(...) Very cool. I like to see MPD support, if possible. -Orion (19 years ago, 26-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Ldraw to Bricklink shopping list converter
|
|
Hi, want to quickly search Bricklink for parts in your Ldraw creation? check (URL): just upload your Ldraw file, and you'll get a complete list of links to Bricklink search pages. Let me know how you like this tool, and make sure you try the MLCad (...) (19 years ago, 26-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) IMO the best solution would be to have a magic number at the start of the parts. eg. 0 LDP or something. That way the 'partness' of each part would be quicly verified merely be reading the first five bytes of the file regardless of (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Surely the extension is entirely to identify the type of file, otherwise they would be irrelevant? While I understand that .dat is a widely used extension it would be foolish if any change was to .ldr (for parts), another extension would make (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I think Tim meant LDraw files distinctive from other programs' .DAT files. Also from (URL) is problematic because its an ambiguous file format, many different programs use it. To identify more with LDraw, we chose LDR." Anyway, as Travis (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Scorpion
|
|
(...) I just met with Chris Dee who is here in New Jersey on a biz trip. He just showed me his render of the Scorpion! I am so impressed! There is hardly another part as hard to make as the Scorpion. He did a fine job. Thank you so much. Lego Fans (...) (19 years ago, 16-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) What can I say? Tim has always been focused sharply on models. Although he used "model" extensively throughout that post, any implication of having separate definitions of "part" vs "model" as file-types is inaccurate. (...) That was entirely (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) this is what I did in the end. nontheless I consider this a bug worth reporting and subsequently sort out the ldr-dat mess we are currently in ;-) w. (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Steve Bliss wrote: [snip-snap] (...) hmm ... I always understod .ldr as scene file and .dat just for parts. at least this was what I thought reding from tim's post back in 2001: (URL) extension change is just that. Nothing changes (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Yes, I would be great. But while it doesn't distinguish, we have to deal with it. I think the naming convention we had had before the .ldr extension, with officicial models named m926.dat and so on, solves this problem. So I suggest you name (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Getting back to the problem at hand, yes I do think this is a bug in L3P, the line specifically says include 926.ldr. Maybe L3P should include the extension as part of the inc file name unless it is .DAT? Of course that will break if the parts (...) (19 years ago, 15-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I read Steve's email as saying that they shouldn't and that the extension doesn't matter but IMO it does. Rereading it, it sounds like the extension does matter but that it shouldn't be used to identify the type of file which I agree with. /me (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) I don't think L3P pays any attention to parts.lst. To be honest, I don't think that it should. It's not an editor that's expected to give you a list of parts available for use. (And to be honest, I think that parts.lst is a generally bad idea, (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) The point is that it is not MLCad which differentiates, it is mklist. Tim (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) But that DOES differentiate between .dat and .ldr by the very fact it has the extension in parts.lst. If it didn't, 3010.dat and 3010.ldr would be interchangeable everywhere. This means that 3010.dat is NOT the same as 3010.ldr but L3P appears (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) No, it doesn't. (...) MLCad has no such restriction - that restriction is put in place by mklist. Go ahead - create parts/3010.LDR, edit parts.lst, add 3010.LDR and a description, it will magically appear in MLCad and be usable just as any (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: L3P-Bug using LGEO
|
|
(...) Actually, there's really no easy way to do part detection, but filenames really aren't a good idea. I'm pretty sure Lars is fully aware of the part detection problem (since it also affects the seams option in L3P), and there have been (...) (19 years ago, 14-Nov-05, to lugnet.cad.dev, FTX)
|
