> do very many new mame versions cause breakage in > compilation? since I've been working on dos mame, these are the changes that have been required:
0.77 needed libm.a added to the makefile for voodoo.c 0.72 needed snapshot changes 0.69/0.70 needed -bios changes 0.66 needed _HUGE added to the makefile ( set to HUGE_VAL ). 0.63 needed file/path handling changes 0.61 needed changes for the new artwork. In some of the early releases I was putting out updated source files because I was running gcc 3.1 while the windows people were on gcc 2.95. The equivalent djgpp version wouldn't run on Windows 2000/XP, but the official binaries were compiled on Windows 98 back then so I didn't have to. Although I get a much easier time now because I don't have to support gcc 2.95 anymore. Personally I would put the xmame source out seperately & maybe also seperate out the program that converts the code to run on different compilers. I would have thought the majority of people would be able to install something around gcc 3.2.2 anyway. As for the license issue, advancemame isn't exactly GPL because it's had a clause added to allow it to be linked to the MAME source & the xbox version tried to claim the whole source tree was under GPL when they went onto sourceforge ( and they can't distribute binaries because they use stolen SDK's to compile it ). There were some people advocating a move towards GPL for the whole project, but you lose too much control. Phill _______________________________________________ Xmame mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
