Discussion on Windows-Port
This was moved from Why isn't there a Windows port to this talks page:
However, there are only 32 files (out of around 11 thousand) in the OpenFOAM source tree whose names differ only in case. It would be fairly easy to rename these files to allow compilation on a case insensitive file-system.
This is more an attempt at starting a discussion and thus better suited for the Message-Board. BTW: it isn't as easy as renaming some files. The files scalar.H/Scalar.H are included by almost all other files and a number of files has to be modified. Whoever does this must redo these changes every time a new release comes out so the best thing would be if it was fixed upstream so you might want to file a bug report with OpenCFD requesting that (best of luck).
Side note: until now all known attempts at porting to Windows were done by Linux-people. After the proof of concept these usually were not followed up due to a lack of motivation (only exception is [1]. So maybe if the Windows-affecinados get together you might have something there (it is not that hard again, just tedious) but don't rely on Linuxers (they are as motivated to do a Windows-port as Windows-people would be to do a Linux-port)
- This was indeed asked some time ago here: bug report #842
- Either way, the problem is that with each release, the files need to be renamed all over again. FreeFOAM has already done this task, but further development seems to have stopped (last update made on 2012-07-23).
- There was also the (unofficial) project and completely abandoned project OpenFOAM for MS windows binary release, in which all indicates that it was a proof of concept done for someone's thesis, which was not continued.
- And as mentioned above, blueCAPE does provide a port of OpenFOAM for Windows, which provides the source code fully adapted to be used on Windows, allowing the user to completely build this port of OpenFOAM directly on Windows; But it was necessary to create dedicated scripts for renaming the files and folders; said scripts that automate the renaming procedure are currently (September 2013) not available to the general public.
- Wyldckat (talk) 23:21, 21 September 2013 (CEST)
- [View source↑]
- [History↑]
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| How about starting to split-off the FAQ into sub-pages? | 8 | 20:13, 11 October 2013 |
Greetings!
I'm thinking about starting to split-off the FAQ into sub-pages, because this one is getting pretty big already.
My idea is to start with ParaView, since I've been answering a lot of questions on this topic on the CFD-Online forums and I think that soon I'll start to forget answers I've already given and repeated questions are starting to occur.
So, the idea was to:
- Create the sub-page Main FAQ/ParaView and paraFoam.
- Transfer the FAQ for it from the Main FAQ, while preserving the respective headers with links to the new location, since there are several outside linkks pointing to existing section headers/anchors.
- Then to continue adding new answers for frequent questions regarding ParaView.
For reference, the sources of new information for this will be:
- http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/paraview/
- http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/openfoam-paraview/
- http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/blogs/wyldckat/533-related-issues-paraview-openfoam-fixes-solutions.html
Best regards, Bruno
Hi!
Good idea. Could I propose something. The conventions on this page this page need some reworking anyway. They were written before I know about the concept of sub-pages and never reworked since. The reworking is on me. But what I'd suggest is the following. Let's start a new page FAQ and make subpages FAQ/Paraview etc to that. Copy over the stuff from the old page and leave the old page intact (that way the links will still work). On the page add a reference to the new FAQ-structure and a remark that this information is outdated and they should go there. Move the new structure into the sidebar and make the old page read-only
The only "problem" would be to have a consistent table of contents for the FAQ. I'll have to think about that
Bernhard
PS: It just occurred to me that using the Semantic-Wiki functionality it would be possible to have "long FAQ" with all questions on one page (I love those) in parallel to the small pages. Just every FAQ-subpage has to be marked with a property (for instance faqChapterNumber). The faqLong will be nothing else than an "include all pages with property faqChapterNumber ordered by faqChapterNumber (but it won't work to replace Main_FAQ with this. The links mentioned above will probably be broken anyway)
Hi Bernhard,
OK, I'm in! If you can pre-up a quick example with the Semantic-thingamabob for the new FAQ + FAQ/ParaView, I'll populate it with some heavy-duty copy-pasting mission :)
Best regards, Bruno
I've added a page FAQ and FAQLong which are basically queries. The page FAQ/General is the first section of the old Main_FAQ copied over. The way stuff looks needs some work:
You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:
You can view and copy the source of this page:
Return to Thread:Talk:Main FAQ/How about starting to split-off the FAQ into sub-pages?/reply (4).
Thanks for your work:
Concerning the problem with the FAQLong: had a look at http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Embedded_format but there seems to be no parameter to add stuff before or after the pages and I'm afraid http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Template_format doesn't allow me to include whole pages
The strange out: I noticed it too. It seems like the extension for threaded discussions and the new editor clash. I'll have a look
I decided to switch the new FAQ online despite the minor formatting problems. THe old FAQ is now Read-only and will be removed eventually
