[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

[ANN] RMagick 1.8.0 released

Tim Hunter

4/30/2005 7:14:00 PM

RMagick 1.8.0 is available on RubyForge:

http://www.rubyforge.org/projec...

The RMagick home page is: http://rmagick.rub...

RMagick is a binding for the ImageMagick and GraphicsMagick image processing
libraries. These libraries support more than 90 image formats including
GIF, JPEG, PNG, PDF, and EPS. RMagick features over 150 methods for image
creation, editing, and format conversion, and includes comprehensive HTML
documentation with more than 175 complete examples.

This release of RMagick incorporates the RVG (Ruby Vector Graphics) library,
which has until now been a separate add-on library. RVG is a library for
drawing 2D graphics with an API based on the SVG specification. RVG
supports all the parts of SVG that ImageMagick/GraphicsMagick supports
(plus a few extra!), including:

        o Structure: RVG, groups, and use
        o User-coordinate systems
        o Coordinate system transformations (translate, rotate, etc.)
        o Basic shapes: line, rectangle, circle, ellipse, polygon, polyline
        o Styles: fill, stroke, opacity, font_size, etc.
        o SVG Paths
        o Text (including advanced styles such as vertical orientation)
        o Patterns
        o Clipping paths
        o Raster images
        o Units conversions (cm, in, etc.)

RVG would be a good library to use if you're writing an application that
needs to programmatically generate drawings, such as a charting
application, especially if you need to export your drawings in multiple
resolutions (web, print, etc.) and multiple image formats.

The RMagick documentation now includes an RVG tutorial and complete coverage
of the RVG API.

--
Tim Hunter
3 Answers

Andreas Schwarz

5/3/2005 6:37:00 PM

0

Tim Hunter wrote:
> RMagick 1.8.0 is available on RubyForge:

I've got a problem with RMagick on OS X. I have installed the
imagemagick and imagemagick-dev packages from fink (version 6.1.8). When
I try to install the gem I get the following error:

make
rmimage.c:16:46: magick/xwindow.h: No such file or directory
rmimage.c: In function `Image_capture':
rmimage.c:581: error: `XImportInfo' undeclared (first use in this function)
rmimage.c:581: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
rmimage.c:581: error: for each function it appears in.)
rmimage.c:581: error: parse error before "ximage_info"
rmimage.c:585: warning: implicit declaration of function `XGetImportInfo'
rmimage.c:585: error: `ximage_info' undeclared (first use in this function)
rmimage.c:614: warning: implicit declaration of function `XImportImage'
rmimage.c:614: warning: assignment makes pointer from integer without a cast
make[1]: *** [rmimage.o] Error 1
setup failed
'system make' failed
try 'ruby install.rb --help' for usage
make: *** [all] Error 1
install.rb: entering install phase...

The rest of the build seems to work and the gem is "successfully"
installed, but after require_gem 'rmagick' the constant Magick is not
defined.


--
http://www.mikrocont...
http://rforum.and... - Ruby Web Forum

Tim Hunter

5/3/2005 7:07:00 PM

0

Andreas Schwarz wrote:
> Tim Hunter wrote:
>
>> RMagick 1.8.0 is available on RubyForge:
>
>
> I've got a problem with RMagick on OS X. I have installed the
> imagemagick and imagemagick-dev packages from fink (version 6.1.8). When
> I try to install the gem I get the following error:

I've not had much luck with fink. Try the procedure I describe at
http://rubyforge.org/forum/forum.php?thread_id=2092&for...
"How to install RMagick on Mac OS X"

By the way, there's a typo in this HOWTO: xMagick's ./configure option
is "--with-gs-font-dir=/opt/local/share/ghostscript/fonts", no quotes,
no embedded blanks.

Lamont Cranston

11/12/2011 1:00:00 AM

0

On 11/9/2011 9:03 AM, Eddie Haskell wrote:
> "MattB"<notrdell1234@gmail.comspam.> wrote in message
> news:i0gjb75ptnsnlsps04ov2mbrdiblvrq160@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 08 Nov 2011 17:25:27 -0600, First Post
>> <LiberalsLie@invalid.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 8 Nov 2011 17:00:35 -0600, "Eddie Haskell"<rrhv@wqpm.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Acid Washed China Blue Jeans"<chine.bleu@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:chine.bleu-076F9C.14360608112011@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>> In article
>>>>> <299dfca8-4f26-4024-93f2-e614b8ec3e18@d37g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> Richard Steel<rsteel2525@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 8, 2:19 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans<chine.b...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>> <87839c91-a3d3-4d02-981f-68203c1f1...@p36g2000prp.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>> Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Nov 8, 1:05 pm, Acid Washed China Blue Jeans
>>>>>>>> <chine.b...@yahoo.com>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article
>>>>>>>>> <d37c70b9-0239-42f1-ba49-93b7b8afe...@i13g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>>>>> Richard Steel<rsteel2...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Strange you said nothing of the Republican bill from
>>>>>>>>>>> Michigan.
>>>>>>>>>>> Selective memory?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> What about it? The slimy Time Magazine article never exactly
>>>>>>>>>> said
>>>>>>>>>> what the law was - only that it was really horrible. Not a
>>>>>>>>>> word
>>>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>>>> the law's authors, or an elected Republican to explain their
>>>>>>>>>> side
>>>>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>> the story. Just hysterics.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So.........what is the explanation?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Beats me - the press doesn't seem to much care.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So you have no evidence the article is biassed; you just have your
>>>>>>> assumption.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have every evidence in the world that the article is biased. Time
>>>>>> Magazine didn't give the GOP space to telling their side of the
>>>>>
>>>>> Neither did you, idiot.
>>>>
>>>> Where is the republican side in the article, you dumb motherfucker?
>>>>
>>>> The article is biased and you fucking know it, you lying sack of shit.
>>>>
>>>> It's just like with hate crimes legislation. You want crimes against your
>>>> favored groups to be worse than against straights or non-minorities
>>>> instead
>>>> of equal across the board. It's divisive and downright un-American, but
>>>> what
>>>> else is new with you socialist maggots?
>>>>
>>>> -Eddie Haskell
>>>>
>>>
>>> The larger problem with most of the current "hate crime" law is the
>>> fact that it allows those it protects to be able to get away with the
>>> exact same type of behavior.
>>> Much like most of America has been brainwashed to believe that only
>>> white males can be racist therefore no minority can ever be considered
>>> racist, the hate crime laws keep those same minorities from ever being
>>> charged with a hate crime themselves.
>>> Just recently when a gang of teenage thugs attacked a family in Ohio
>>> yelling ''This is our world'' and ''This is a black world'' the
>>> authorities simply refused to treat it as a hate crime.
>>> http://www.ohio.com/news/akron-police-investigate-teen-mob-attack-on-famil...
>>>
>>> Wonder how fast the charges of HATE CRIME would fly had it been a
>>> black family confronted by a gang of white teens yelling "this is a
>>> white world"?
>>>
>>> So effectively white males are the only demographic that has to worry
>>> about being prosecuted twice for the same crime based solely upon
>>> their race and white males are also the only demographic that is
>>> prohibited from charging anyone else with a hate crime against them.
>>>
>>
>> I've seen similar things. Took my car in for repair and then took a
>> bus back downtown. Thier were many Blacks in the back of the Bus
>> talking about all the White women they saw. Talk about racist.
>
> Well, at least they were in the back of the bus.
>
> -Eddie Haskell

Your racism is showing again, Iddie.