[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: terminals_with_size
From: |
Ben Abbott |
Subject: |
Re: terminals_with_size |
Date: |
Wed, 14 Sep 2016 21:11:49 -0400 |
> On Sep 14, 2016, at 9:00 PM, Rik <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On 09/14/2016 05:44 PM, Tatsuro MATSUOKA wrote:
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>
>>> From: Rik
>>> To: John W. Eaton ; Mike Miller
>>> Cc: Octave-Maintainers
>>> Date: 2016/9/15, Thu 05:20
>>> Subject: Re: Minimum gnuplot version for Octave 4.2?
>>>
>>> On 09/14/2016 11:16 AM, John W. Eaton wrote:
>>>> On 09/14/2016 01:26 PM, Mike Miller wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 09:52:14 -0700, Rik wrote:
>>>>>> Is there any objection to requiring a minimum gnuplot version of
>>> 4.4 for
>>>>>> the next release? The release date was March 2010, or 6.5 years
>>> ago. The
>>>>>> 4.2 series had a release date of April 2007, but I don't think
>>> anyone has
>>>>>> tried to use Octave with gnuplot 4.2.X and I'm not really sure
>>> it would
>>>>>> work anymore. In our own README.gnuplot we say, "Octave works
>>> best with
>>>>>> gnuplot 4.4 or higher, which is available from
>>> http://www.gnuplot.info."
>>>>>> I happened to notice in the documentation for image() that we still
>>> have
>>>>>> "*Warning:* X and Y are ignored when using gnuplot 4.0 or
>>> earlier." which
>>>>>> is horrendously out of date.
>>>>> None here.
>>>>>
>>>>> RHEL/CentOS 5 has gnuplot 4.0 and RHEL/CentOS 6 has gnuplot 4.2. All
>>>>> other current supported versions of distros that I know of have 4.4 or
>>>>> later. I think it's safe to drop checks and warnings messages for
>>> any
>>>>> version lower than 4.4. Gnuplot should be very easy to build on older
>>>>> GNU or UNIX distros that may need a newer version.
>>>> It's OK with me as well.
>>>>
>>>> jwe
>>>>
>>> Okay, done in this cset
>>> (http://hg.savannah.gnu.org/hgweb/octave/rev/a666e3ee6af8).
>>>
>>> --Rik
>>
>> In the above changeset.
>>
>> --- a/scripts/plot/util/__gnuplot_drawnow__.m
>> +++ b/scripts/plot/util/__gnuplot_drawnow__.m
>> @@ -193,16 +193,8 @@
>> "epscairo", "epslatex", "fig", "gif", ...
>> "jpeg", "latex", "pbm", "pdf", "pdfcairo",
>> ...
>> "postscript", "png", "pngcairo", "pstex",
>> ...
>> - "pslatex", "svg", "tikz"};
>> - if (__gnuplot_has_feature__ ("windows_figure_position"))
>> - terminals_with_size{end+1} = "windows";
>> - endif
>> - if (__gnuplot_has_feature__ ("x11_figure_position"))
>> - terminals_with_size{end+1} = "x11";
>> - endif
>> - if (__gnuplot_has_feature__ ("wxt_figure_size"))
>> - terminals_with_size{end+1} = "wxt";
>> - endif
>> + "pslatex", "svg", "tikz", "windows", ...
>> + "wxt", "x11"};
>>
>>
>> Attached code
>> if (all (gnuplot_size > 0))
>> terminals_with_size = {"canvas", "cairolatex", "eepic", "emf", ...
>> "epscairo", "epslatex", "fig", "gif", ...
>> "jpeg", "latex", "pbm", "pdf", "pdfcairo",
>> ...
>> "postscript", "png", "pngcairo", "pstex", ...
>> "pslatex", "svg", "tikz", "windows", ...
>> "wxt", "x11"};
>>
>> I do not see "qt".
>>
>> The qt terminal is implemented from gnuplot 4.6 and default terminal from
>> gnuplot 5.0.
>
> Is qt a terminal_with_size? I don't know. Someone who understands gnuplot
> and Octave can chime in on whether it should be added to the list.
The gnuplot 4.5 manual indicates “qt” supports size.
set term qt {<n>}
{size <width>,<height>}
Looks like the syntax for size is the same as wxt, x11, etc.
Ben
- Re: Minimum gnuplot version for Octave 4.2?, (continued)
- Re: Minimum gnuplot version for Octave 4.2?, Rik, 2016/09/14
- Re: Minimum gnuplot version for Octave 4.2?, Tatsuro MATSUOKA, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size, Rik, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size, Mike Miller, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size, Tatsuro MATSUOKA, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size, Rik, 2016/09/15
- Re: terminals_with_size, Dmitri A. Sergatskov, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size, Tatsuro MATSUOKA, 2016/09/15
- Re: terminals_with_size, Tatsuro MATSUOKA, 2016/09/15
- Re: terminals_with_size, Tatsuro MATSUOKA, 2016/09/14
- Re: terminals_with_size,
Ben Abbott <=
- Message not available
- Re: terminals_with_size, Rik, 2016/09/14