PIG

[Bob Olson]

if we don't, all it would take is applying that patch to the ag-vic in the
SF tree.  There's also support in the rm's for running a capture vic
that's also displaying (back from doing original development on linux).

--bob

On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Ivan R. Judson wrote:

> 
> Do we have a single fixed UCL that can transmit and do direct X and
> auto-place and whatever other mods we've made?
> 
> --Ivan
> 
> ..........
> Ivan R. Judson .~. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~judson
> Futures Laboratory .~.  630 252 0920
> Argonne National Laboratory .~. 630 252 6424 Fax
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Bob Olson [mailto:olson at mcs.anl.gov] 
> > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 10:17 PM
> > To: Michael E. Papka
> > Cc: 'Terry Disz'; judson at mcs.anl.gov; 'Ti Leggett'; 
> > 'Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov'
> > Subject: RE: PIG
> > 
> > 
> > Yes; the UCL crashing on multiprocessor bug has been fixed 
> > (patch was sent to ag-tech May-ish). So we need to either 
> > switch to the fixed UCL or add encryption support to OMvic. 
> > (I'd argue for moving to fixed UCL to reduce the number of 
> > different components).
> > 
> > --bob
> > 
> > On Fri, 27 Sep 2002, Michael E. Papka wrote:
> > 
> > > OM is used in windows pig, ucl vic does not work with 
> > multiprocessor 
> > > on windows.
> > > 
> > > Ucl vic is used with linux pig (which has not been released)
> > > 
> > > Does that clarify?
> > > 
> > > Mike
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] On 
> > > Behalf Of Terry Disz
> > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:58 PM
> > > To: judson at mcs.anl.gov; 'Ti Leggett'
> > > Cc: 'Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov'
> > > Subject: RE: PIG
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I was just asking for a definitive answer about what goes 
> > out now with 
> > > the PIG. Mike's answer seems in conflict with Ti's. Sure, OM seems 
> > > like the best choice if the encryption thing gets fixed. I 
> > just want 
> > > to solve this immediate problem of getting something out to 
> > Mary Anne.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Terry
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Ivan R. Judson [mailto:judson at mcs.anl.gov]
> > > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:54 PM
> > > > To: 'Terry Disz'; 'Ti Leggett'
> > > > Cc: 'Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov'
> > > > Subject: RE: PIG
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think the basic reason is we're trying to move from UCL to OM. 
> > > > Since
> > > 
> > > > OM has the latest history of support (although that's scaling back
> > > > towards zero too).  The OM stuff is supposed to be getting H.263 
> > > > decode any time now; and they have made a lot of changes 
> > specifically 
> > > > for us, including an interface for autolayout stuff.
> > > >
> > > > Depending on what Larry says about encryption it might 
> > make sense to
> > > > still include both (but a single UCL version if we can) while we 
> > > > figure out the right thing to do in the long run. Media 
> > tools seem to 
> > > > be not the project of choice for funding now; we might 
> > have to support
> > > 
> > > > them ourselves until funding reappears, if our platform choices
> > > > require it.
> > > >
> > > > The commercial argument is performance, but if we have to 
> > trade-off
> > > > options I'd lean towards Quicktime since it works on 
> > linux, macs, and 
> > > > windows, whereas direct * stuff is windows only. Real 
> > isn't a codec 
> > > > system, rather content delivery so they don't play in this game 
> > > > directly.
> > > >
> > > > I'd still prefer the open source stuff and OM in particular, but
> > > > whatever we gotta do let's optimize for our own cycle 
> > count first :-)
> > > >
> > > > --Ivan
> > > >
> > > > ..........
> > > > Ivan R. Judson .~. http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~judson
> > > > Futures Laboratory .~.  630 252 0920
> > > > Argonne National Laboratory .~. 630 252 6424 Fax
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov 
> > [mailto:owner-ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov] 
> > > > > On
> > > > > Behalf Of Terry Disz
> > > > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 12:45 PM
> > > > > To: Ti Leggett
> > > > > Cc: Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov
> > > > > Subject: RE: PIG
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyone know about this for sure? Which VIC goes out with Windows
> > > > > PIG? If it is OM, why can't it be UCL?
> > > > >
> > > > > Terry
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Ti Leggett [mailto:leggett at mcs.anl.gov]
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 11:56 AM
> > > > > > To: Terry Disz
> > > > > > Cc: Ag-Dev at Mcs. Anl. Gov
> > > > > > Subject: Re: PIG
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I think we only use UCL vic for the linux pig, the windows
> > > > > pig we have
> > > > > > to use OM for some reason or another...?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, 2002-09-26 at 13:39, Terry Disz wrote:
> > > > > > > Last week in Washington Mary Anne said she would like a PIG
> > > > > > system for her
> > > > > > > office and asked if I would supply her with the
> > > > > requirements. As I
> > > > > > > was getting ready to do so, the issue of the OM vic 
> > not doing
> > > > > > encryption came up
> > > > > > > on AG-TECH.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can't send her something that doesn't work securely in a
> > > > > > secure room, so,
> > > > > > > I am wondering what the latest thoughts on this 
> > situation are.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Does anyone know where we stand right now?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are there any plans to a) add encryption to OM or b)
> > > > > supply UCL vic
> > > > > > > with PIG?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Terry
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Ti Leggett <leggett at mcs.anl.gov>
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
>