--- smf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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.
I have personally encountered compilation problems with gcc 2.91 and 2.95.3, and also discovered that gcc 3.2.x produces slower executables on my old-skool Linux box than 2.95. I also have to thank Lawrence for maintaining 2.95 compile-ability. :-) So it's probably safer not to assume everyone will upgrade gcc versions. Or that everyone runs gcc. (I have a MIPSpro on my IRIX 6.5.20, but found gcc and xmame 0.61 on the freeware discs.) On the subject of patching, there's something to be said for it, but it doesn't reduce the net bandwidth needed. Just shunts more to mame's site. And then it makes the end user download 2 files. And then a jillion users each have to do the work of patching code instead of just one person. And you know there will be a hundred newbies getting confused because they accidentally patched xmame patch X to mame version Y and it won't compile.....etc. So it's much easier to have a one-stop-shop. Unlike, say, mozilla, where firebird code was not in the tarball and I had to download half a gig through CVS to get it. I am eager to see what the TMS32031 improvements do for xmame 0.77, and have heard stories about Guardians of the Hood for years, but I will gladly wait for Lawrence's OK before attempting a compile. :-) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard http://antispam.yahoo.com/whatsnewfree _______________________________________________ Xmame mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://toybox.twisted.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/xmame
