Hg #7991 broke DOSBox on OS X

Commit 7991 broke DOSBox on OS X.

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).

Still correctly working DOSBox https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7737184/Dosbox/DOSBox-0.74-1.dmg and my broken SVN built at https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/7737184/Dosbox/Dosbox-Snapshot-bad.dmg

A test config is a plain text file, must be named dosbox.conf and can just have these two lines:
[autoexec]
FOOBAR

(it will say illegal command FOOBAR when launched)

Now I know… SDL 1.2 end of life… etc… but this is annoying :frowning:

Dominus wrote:

Now I know… SDL 1.2 end of life… etc… but this is annoying :frowning:

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…)
:slight_smile:
In the worst case I’ll just revert this commit locally of course :slight_smile:

Is this the one?

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]


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

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.

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 :frowning:

JeZxLeeOn 09/06/2016 05:51 PM, Jonathan Dearborn wrote:

Is this the one?
https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/rev/cfec3f86fba7

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 D

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 5:36 PM, Dominus <domiman at gmail.com <mailto:domiman at gmail.com>> wrote:

*Dominus wrote:*

Now I know... SDL 1.2 end of life... etc... but this is annoying 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...)
Smile
In the worst case I'll just revert this commit locally of course Smile

_______________________________________________
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org <mailto:SDL at lists.libsdl.org>
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
<http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org>

SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

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).

The 3rd party patch is at http://www.vogons.org/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=34770 and if you really want to pay money, the DOSBox devs might be inclined to work on that in this case :slight_smile:

(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 :frowning:

Sik 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).

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 :slight_smile:

Hi,

I am not too good with building from source,
Is there an Ubuntu 16.04 PPA for this DOSBox-X somewhere?
Thanks!

JeZxLeeOn 09/06/2016 06:13 PM, Sik the hedgehog wrote:

2016-09-06 19:06 GMT-03:00, Jesse Palser <@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).


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

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)

JeZxLeeOn 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
<@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).


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

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 <jessepalsermailinglists at gmail
.com>:

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).


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

are the native Linux Quake builds the full game or only the shareware?

JeZxLeeOn 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” <@Jesse_Palser mailto: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
        <@Jesse_Palser
        <mailto:@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).
        _______________________________________________
        SDL mailing list
        SDL at lists.libsdl.org <mailto:SDL at lists.libsdl.org>
        http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
        <http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org>



_______________________________________________
SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org <mailto:SDL at lists.libsdl.org>
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org
<http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org>

SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org

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).


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org


SDL mailing list
SDL at lists.libsdl.org
http://lists.libsdl.org/listinfo.cgi/sdl-libsdl.org


//David Olofson - Consultant, Developer, Artist, Open Source Advocate

.— Games, examples, libraries, scripting, sound, music, graphics —.
| http://consulting.olofson.net http://olofsonarcade.com |
’---------------------------------------------------------------------’

2016-09-06 19:33 GMT-03:00, Jesse Palser :

I am not too good with building from source,
Is there an Ubuntu 16.04 PPA for this DOSBox-X somewhere?
Thanks!

Just GitHub afaik :confused: Though I may ask since the 64-bit build still
doesn’t have JIT and results in all late DOS games running like crap.

To hijack this thread back to the original topic, I think this fixes the
DOSBox bug that Dominus was seeing:

 https://hg.libsdl.org/SDL/rev/0c1a8b0429a9

–ryan.On 9/7/16 6:08 PM, Sik the hedgehog wrote:

2016-09-06 19:33 GMT-03:00, Jesse Palser :

I am not too good with building from source,
Is there an Ubuntu 16.04 PPA for this DOSBox-X somewhere?
Thanks!

Just GitHub afaik :confused: Though I may ask since the 64-bit build still
doesn’t have JIT and results in all late DOS games running like crap.