DOSBox still uses SDL 1.2 and I’m providing daily snapshots for a while now and thus have been dependent on the post SDL 1.2.15 fixes.
DOSBox usually uses a config file in ~/Library/Preferences but if you place a config named dosbox.conf in the same folder as the app bundle, DOSBox will use that config instead.
I only just today realized that this is no longer working and traced it back to revision 7991.
So a built of SDL 1.2 branch before rev 7991 allows DOSBox to launch with the in-same-folder config on OS X 10.6 - 10.12 (tested on VMs of 10.6, 10.8, 10.9 and real 10.12 machine).
Now I know… SDL 1.2 end of life… etc… but this is annoying
That being said, I feel oh so entitled to have this fixed because of all the suffering I had to go through to find out what the culprit of the broken DOSBox behavior was.
(going through the backup of my snapshots to find out when it broke, seeing no obvious change in DOSBox code, going through my time machine backups, seeing that I had updated my built environment just before the broken built, restoring the old working build environment and going through the updated libs to see which one broke it…)
In the worst case I’ll just revert this commit locally of course
It does seem like an easy local revert if the old version does indeed still
work on OS X 10.9+.
Has there been any discussion about upgrading to SDL 2.0? I’ve upgraded
many of my own older projects and it’s not too bad if you know what you’re
doing.
Jonny DOn Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Dominus wrote:
Dominus wrote:
Now I know… SDL 1.2 end of life… etc… but this is annoying [image:
Sad]
That being said, I feel oh so entitled to have this fixed because of all
the suffering I had to go through to find out what the culprit of the
broken DOSBox behavior was.
(going through the backup of my snapshots to find out when it broke,
seeing no obvious change in DOSBox code, going through my time machine
backups, seeing that I had updated my built environment just before the
broken built, restoring the old working build environment and going through
the updated libs to see which one broke it…)
[image: Smile]
In the worst case I’ll just revert this commit locally of course [image:
Smile]
A right, yes that one. I got confused by changeset and revision.
So far DOSBox development is pretty slow and the remaining devs are likely not too eager to take the step. There is a 3rd party patch with lots of porting done already, though.
(I’m NOT a DOSBox dev - I only provide the OS X builds)
JeZ-l-Lee wrote:> Hi,
I would pay money for a new DOSBox based on SDL2!
Running Linux Mint 18 MATE 64Bit Linux
but on my thin client with Intel HD graphics DOSBox does not work
DOSBox-X was already ported to SDL2 I think (though I don’t remember
for sure, may want to recheck).
To stray the topic further, Dosbox-x has forked too much from Dosbox already. If your intention is to play game I’d stick to main Dosbox. If you aim for booting other OS in Dosbox and more hardcore hardware emulation Dosbox-x is a good way to spend time
AFAIK, just as with Doom, Q3A, RTCW etc, the engine and game code is
GPL, so that’s what those builds are based on. To play the full game,
you need to grab the data files from your full Windows/Mac/whatever
version.On Wed, Sep 7, 2016 at 4:24 PM, Jesse Palser wrote:
are the native Linux Quake builds the full game or only the shareware?
JeZxLee
On 09/07/2016 07:57 AM, Iv?n Vodopiviz wrote:
There are native Quake builds for Linux…
On Sep 7, 2016 8:41 AM, “Jesse Palser” wrote:
Hi,
Guess that’s a no on the Ubuntu 16.04 PPA?
I like to play original DOS “Quake” in DOSBox on my Linux.
(it’s a masterpiece, even to this day)
JeZxLee
On 09/06/2016 06:33 PM, Jesse Palser wrote:
Hi,
I am not too good with building from source,
Is there an Ubuntu 16.04 PPA for this DOSBox-X somewhere?
Thanks!
JeZxLee
On 09/06/2016 06:13 PM, Sik the hedgehog wrote:
2016-09-06 19:06 GMT-03:00, Jesse Palser
:
I would pay money for a new DOSBox based on SDL2!
DOSBox-X was already ported to SDL2 I think (though I don’t remember
for sure, may want to recheck).
Though I may ask since the 64-bit build still