On 4/5/10, C yp  wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 2:52 AM, Guangcong Luo  wrote:
>  > Looks like the ML is back up.
>  > On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 2:27 PM, buginator  wrote:
> >> ...
>  >...
> >> The network code, AFAICT, we do not have any network related crashes 
> >> anymore.
>  >> Yes, we got sync issues, but the 2.3 series will always have them.
>  >> Cyp's work with newnet should fix the sync issues, but, last I looked,
>  >> that version will __NOT__ work with 32bit systems at this time.  This
>  >> is both on MSVC & cross-compiled builds.
>  >
>  > What about newnet requires 64-bit support? That seem so weird...
> I think (97.13% sure) that it was working on a 32-bit Linux system
>  with sse2, and was working on at least one mac.
>  If I remember right, then the only issue is it not working on w32,
>  even if cross-compiled with gcc. I couldn't cross-compile it myself,
>  and haven't seen the assembler output of fptest1() in main.c, so I
>  can't determine if it's a wrong-code generation, or if it's windows
>  messing with the floating point registers somehow. (I once had an
>  issue with a version of Linux failing to restore the floating point
>  state correctly, so something like that wouldn't surprise me too
>  much.)

Oh, right.  I forgot I got it working on linux 32bit OK.  At least, I
think it was OK.  It has been too long.

MSVC & the CC version on windows are the big thorns.

  >  No objections to Qt and newnet being merged as soon as possible.
>  I don't have any spare time at the moment. If squeezing a merge in, I
>  would at most be able to test if it compiles, not whether it runs.
>  (Should one expect 60fps via ssh X forwarding over a very unstable
>  network, or would it just be the usual 30fps as when running native?)

Maybe i-Nod can chime in if he got Qt or newnet working or not.  For
now, both branches are in a hold pattern for me, until we can push 2.3
out the door.

We still have a fairly big crowd that uses MSVC, so I don't see us
dropping that anytime soon, if ever.

Warzone-dev mailing list

Reply via email to