Porting to 2.0 (Re: Performer 1.2 on Impact)

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

Gary Williams (gewillia++at++afit.af.mil)
Thu, 21 Mar 1996 23:45:57 EDT

> My advice is to go back to the customer and explain that porting
> to 2.0 is really not that difficult, and that all registered 1.2
> users with software maintenance get a free copy, etc., and see if
> there is some way to make the transition happen. ...

OK... Since you addressed porting to 2.0, I've got a couple questions.

First, I've been monitoring the Performer mail list for a couple months or so
and it seems numerous bugs have been reported with 2.0. I haven't researched
the 1.2 bug list, but which is more stable (more to the point, how risky is the
port)?

Secondly, our apps are written in C++, not C. I saw a message the other day
that the porting scripts don't handle C++ apps. Is this correct or did I
misunderstand something? If I did read it correctly, any suggestions on
efficiently porting C++ apps?

I assume we'll need to go to 2.x at some point in the (near) future, but is this
the best time or should we wait for things to settle out a bit? We're running
our high performance apps on Onyx RE^2s and we're still running IRIX 5.3. I
don't anticipate an upgrade to 6.x in the immediate future.

Thanks in advance for pointing out migration issues we want to be sure to
consider.

Gary

******************************************************
GARY E. WILLIAMS, Capt, USAF
Air Force Institute of Technology
MS Student in Computer Systems: Modeling & Simulation
Official Email: gewillia++at++afit.af.mil
Personal Email: Sleuth61++at++msn.com
http://www.afit.af.mil/ENGgraphics/people/gewillia/index.html

New Message Reply Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2 on Mon Aug 10 1998 - 17:52:34 PDT

This message has been cleansed for anti-spam protection. Replace '++at++' in any mail addresses with the '@' symbol.