automatically create mk file

[Kevin E]

I just updated hugin to Pre-Release 2014.1.0.ef7e9d77560a.  In the past when I created an pano and saved the pto file hugin would also save a .mk file.  This version doesn't appear to be saving the .mk file at the same time, was that feature removed?  I looked through the preferences but didn't see where it could be turned on.

Thanks,

Kevin

[Terry Duell]

Hello Kevin,

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 08:26:25 +1000, Kevin E <metrodcph...@gmail.com>
wrote:

The makefile stitching engine is no longer a part of the current source,
so no longer have pto2mk, or use a makefile to do the stitching.
Hugin now uses hugin_executor which makes direct calls to the various
programs that do the stitching. hugin_executor is also called to stitch
from a script or batch file.
Use 'hugin_executor -h', or 'man hugin_executor' to get help.

Cheers,
--
Regards,
Terry Duell

[David W. Jones]

Just out of curiousity, why was the ability to use a makefile removed?
I'd think it eminently suited for situations where you use one machine
with GUI to create and config PTO files (perhaps a LOT of them), then
hand them off to other machines to stitch without requiring the other
machines to run a GUI. Or maybe the idea is that stitching must now
REQUIRE interactive use, rather than batch use?

FWIW, I have Hugin 2014.something on here and there's no hugin_executor
at all. Yet when Hugin's stitching, there's no MK file, either. There's
an ARG file.

Oh, well. Part of me dreads the switch from a slow (but very functional
and high quality enblend) to Hugin's fresh-from-scratch own internal
blender. I saw the email about someone getting blurred places when using
enblend now, but I never have.

--
David W. Jones
gnome...@gmail.com
wandering the landscape of god
http://dancingtreefrog.com

[Bruno Postle]

On 22 April 2015 08:15:15 BST, David W. Jones wrote:
>On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Terry Duell wrote:
>
>Just out of curiousity, why was the ability to use a makefile removed?

It was a nice idea and works very well in the right circumstances, but the handling of special characters is unfixable. The bug reports wasted hundreds of hours of developer time, and I can't begin to imagine how many thousands of users gave up on Hugin when 'make' didn't like their filenames.

>I'd think it eminently suited for situations where you use one machine
>with GUI to create and config PTO files (perhaps a LOT of them), then
>hand them off to other machines to stitch without requiring the other
>machines to run a GUI. Or maybe the idea is that stitching must now
>REQUIRE interactive use, rather than batch use?

Stitching will still work without the GUI - though I think hugin_executor does depend on wxwidgets even though it doesn't use a display.

There is also pto2mk2 in Panotools::Script which is more or less a drop-in replacement for pto2mk, this isn't going away - I might even rename this to pto2mk so old scripts carry on working.

>Oh, well. Part of me dreads the switch from a slow (but very functional
>and high quality enblend) to Hugin's fresh-from-scratch own internal
>blender. I saw the email about someone getting blurred places when
>using enblend now, but I never have.

The new blender is just another option as its behaviour is very different. I expect Hugin packages will still require enblend as it has much more functionality. The fact that the new blender comes with Hugin has more to do with ease of code maintenance than any intent to replace enblend.

--
Bruno

[Kevin E]

On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 at 5:56:13 AM UTC-4, Bruno Postle wrote:

On 22 April 2015 08:15:15 BST, David W. Jones wrote:
>On 04/21/2015 04:11 PM, Terry Duell wrote:

>I'd think it eminently suited for situations where you use one machine
>with GUI to create and config PTO files (perhaps a LOT of them), then
>hand them off to other machines to stitch without requiring the other
>machines to run a GUI. Or maybe the idea is that stitching must now
>REQUIRE interactive use, rather than batch use?

Stitching will still work without the GUI - though I think hugin_executor does depend on wxwidgets even though it doesn't use a display.

There is also pto2mk2 in Panotools::Script which is more or less a drop-in replacement for pto2mk, this isn't going away - I might even rename this to pto2mk so old scripts carry on working.

Great!  I used the mk file for another program I wrote to spread the different stages across computers on my network, so as long pto2mk2 still does the same thing I'll be set.

Thanks,

Kevin