Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Tcl/Tk 8.5.13 Release Candidates
66 views
Skip to first unread message
Don Porter
Nov 9, 2012, 4:11:07 PM11/9/12
to
Release Candidate downloads of the 8.5.13 releases of Tcl and Tk may
now be found at
ftp://ftp.tcl.tk/pub/tcl/tcl8_5/tcl8.5.13rc1-src.tar.gz
ftp://ftp.tcl.tk/pub/tcl/tcl8_5/tk8.5.13rc1-src.tar.gz
ftp://ftp.tcl.tk/pub/tcl/tcl8_5/tcl8513rc1-src.zip
ftp://ftp.tcl.tk/pub/tcl/tcl8_5/tk8513rc1-src.zip
ftp://ftp.tcl.tk/pub/tcl/tcl8_5/tcl8.5.13rc1-html.tar.gz
The actual releases of these files should come on November 12.
Until then, enjoy this advance preview, and if you find anything
catastrophically wrong with them, please inform me so we can fix
the problem before the true release.
Also available for preview are the draft release notes:
http://sf.net/projects/tcl/files/Tcl/8.5.13/tcltk-release-notes-8.5.13.txt/view
--
| Don Porter Applied and Computational Mathematics Division |
| donald...@nist.gov Information Technology Laboratory |
| http://math.nist.gov/~DPorter/ NIST |
|______________________________________________________________________|
Christian Gollwitzer
Nov 9, 2012, 6:15:42 PM11/9/12
to
Am 09.11.12 22:11, schrieb Don Porter:
> http://sf.net/projects/tcl/files/Tcl/8.5.13/tcltk-release-notes-8.5.13.txt/view
>
>
From the release notes:
* Fixed crashes in...
- [wm forget] on Cocoa
Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
Thanks for the update
Christian
> http://sf.net/projects/tcl/files/Tcl/8.5.13/tcltk-release-notes-8.5.13.txt/view
>
>
From the release notes:
* Fixed crashes in...
- [wm forget] on Cocoa
Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
Thanks for the update
Christian
Kevin Walzer
Nov 9, 2012, 11:05:54 PM11/9/12
to
On 11/9/12 6:15 PM, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
> Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
> Thanks for the update
I think the crash is fixed; I can no longer crash Wish running the
> Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
> Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
> Thanks for the update
sample script you appended. So, I've closed the bug. Redraw of the
window is still a bit wonky, but that wasn't the focus of the bug.
--
Kevin Walzer
Code by Kevin
http://www.codebykevin.com
Christian Gollwitzer
Nov 10, 2012, 3:47:11 AM11/10/12
to
Am 10.11.12 05:05, schrieb Kevin Walzer:
TkWmDeadWindow. The issue with "tk busy" was that a window recieved
messages after being destroyed, while the only thing happening was that
the busy window was created, never mapped, and then destroyed - might be
"accidentally" fixed, too.
Christian
> On 11/9/12 6:15 PM, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
>> Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
>> Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
>> Thanks for the update
>
> I think the crash is fixed; I can no longer crash Wish running the
> sample script you appended. So, I've closed the bug. Redraw of the
> window is still a bit wonky, but that wasn't the focus of the bug.
>
Great!! Can you also check 3573447? I see the patch did something with
>> Whoohooo! Does this entirely fix the annoying problems with wm forget on
>> Cocoa? (bug 3382423?) That'd be a big step forward:)
>> Thanks for the update
>
> I think the crash is fixed; I can no longer crash Wish running the
> sample script you appended. So, I've closed the bug. Redraw of the
> window is still a bit wonky, but that wasn't the focus of the bug.
>
TkWmDeadWindow. The issue with "tk busy" was that a window recieved
messages after being destroyed, while the only thing happening was that
the busy window was created, never mapped, and then destroyed - might be
"accidentally" fixed, too.
Christian
Kevin Walzer
Nov 10, 2012, 9:24:00 AM11/10/12
to
On 11/10/12 3:47 AM, Christian Gollwitzer wrote:
> Great!! Can you also check 3573447? I see the patch did something with
> TkWmDeadWindow. The issue with "tk busy" was that a window recieved
> messages after being destroyed, while the only thing happening was that
> the busy window was created, never mapped, and then destroyed - might be
> "accidentally" fixed, too.
I don't think that one has been addressed yet.
> Great!! Can you also check 3573447? I see the patch did something with
> TkWmDeadWindow. The issue with "tk busy" was that a window recieved
> messages after being destroyed, while the only thing happening was that
> the busy window was created, never mapped, and then destroyed - might be
> "accidentally" fixed, too.
--Kevin
0 new messages