Vulture's Eye and Vulture's Claw

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Frank Rademakers wrote:

> There is a bug in the website, when viewed with IE. The scrollbar isn't
> working anymore. And I totally cannot get it back to work. Grr!
>
> If anyone knows what the problem might be, please tell me!

\begin{cheap trick}
IE ?
\end{cheap trick}

(there exists plenty of browser that are free and do respect W3C
standards)

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Frank Rademakers wrote:
>
>
>>Jym schreef:
>>
>>>Would it be possible to have some INSTALL file explaining stuff (I never
>>>liked reading Makefiles) ?
>>
>>And we'll make a better manual. It's on our list, but you know how it is
>>with programmers and manuals...
>
>
> Yeah, I know... I think none of my programs have anything close to a
> manual...
>
> Well, even if the INSTALL file only contains the 4 instructions lines from
> the Makefile, I would think it better, I always feel like doing something
> forbidden and dangerous when reading Makefiles without being asked so...


Me too.

> (and so I always prefered programs with correct ./configure rather than
> programs asking to edit Makefiles, but this is another problem).
>
> Hypocoristiquement,
> Jym.

I was once told that the Nethack codebase predates "configure" so it
continues to use manual Makefile and since Falcon's/Vulture's Eye is
just Nethack with a spiffed up UI....



CronoCloud (Ron Rogers)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

bliNOSPAMNO97jdw@studserv.uni-leipzig.de wrote:
>>Ok. Done. I added two zipfiles, with sound. Let me know if it works,
>>otherwise I can replace them with zips without sound.
>
>
> yes it works, thank you.
> i would suggest to generally distribute the sounds
> as optional package, because the whole thing is a bit large
> for people without broadband.
>
> i have replaced sdl.dll with the one i normally use (only 1/10
> of the size, yours is probably the debug-enabled version) and i
> also have compressed the main program with upx.
> all in all this saves another 5mb, and the whole (without sounds)
> is just around 12mb when installed and about 6.2mb when zipped.
>
> anyway, this is probably only interesting to minimalists 😉
>
>
> b.wilke

I'm another minimalist, though I run Linux. 32MB RAM, 294MHz CPU and
yes, it's playable.(Though I usually play ordinary X11 tiled nethack)


CronoCloud (Ron Rogers)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

bliNOSPAMNO97jdw@studserv.uni-leipzig.de wrote:
>>Ok. Done. I added two zipfiles, with sound. Let me know if it works,
>>otherwise I can replace them with zips without sound.
>
>
> yes it works, thank you.
> i would suggest to generally distribute the sounds
> as optional package, because the whole thing is a bit large
> for people without broadband.
>
> i have replaced sdl.dll with the one i normally use (only 1/10
> of the size, yours is probably the debug-enabled version) and i
> also have compressed the main program with upx.
> all in all this saves another 5mb, and the whole (without sounds)
> is just around 12mb when installed and about 6.2mb when zipped.
>

The DLL's are built with debug on because it is not an official release
yet and may infact be a bug haven 🙁
when 1.9.4 is released, the binaries should be tighter i agree, but for
now it's usefull in tracing where things explode .... if they do

Clive Crous

> anyway, this is probably only interesting to minimalists 😉
>
>
> b.wilke

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym wrote:
> On Thu, 9 Jun 2005, Frank Rademakers wrote:
>
>
>>Jym wrote:
>>
>>>Could you make the name of the archive (for Veye and Vclaw) different, so
>>>that we could download both of them in the same place (eg /usr/src) ?
>>>
>>>Hypocoristiquement,
>>>Jym.
>>
>>As it is, it's a single repository that contains both versions at the
>>same time. So you only have to download the one file.
>
>
> OK. This is rather unclear at first sight.
>
>
>> From the Makefile:
>>to build NetHack in your home directory: make nethack-home
>>to build Slashem in your home directory: make nethack-home
>>to build * Both in your home directory: make home
>
>
> Yes. Is the Slashem line really correct ? (especially since target 'home'
> goes to targets 'nethack-home' and 'slashem-home').
>
> Is it possible to build the stuff in standard directories (/usr/games),
> with root privileges of course ?
>
> By the way, both nethack-home and slashem-home leads to errors on my
> system (debian testing), apparently something SDL related but I did not
> grab all the error messages (we should maybe continue discussion about
> that via mail rather than on rgrn).
>

as im moving towards 1.9.4 im making the distinction between vultures
eye (nethack) and vultures claw (slashem) less explicit. by the time
1.9.4 arrives, there will be one page on darkarts.co.za for both, one
source download, one install. For binary distributions however they
will probably be shipped seperate as that is the nature of installers
and programs. For source code however im tiring of updating dual
repositories (in fact as of this morning my 'two' repositories on my
website are just symlinked to a single "vultures" repo)

to build from source and install in the usual locations follow the
normal unix building instuctions for each of nethack and slashem as you
would when building their vanilla versions from source.

sdl: the source code is targeted at freebsd not linux, to build in
linux, edit (nethack|slashem)/sys/unix/Makefile.src and search replace
" sdl11-config " with "sdl-config"



hope this helps
Clive

> Hypocoristiquement,
> Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Clive Crous wrote:

> to build from source and install in the usual locations follow the
> normal unix building instuctions for each of nethack and slashem as you
> would when building their vanilla versions from source.

Is it really necessary to have nethack|slash'em sources as well as
Vulture's * ? Naively, I would have think that the GUI only interprets
stuff from the program and send stuff to it without need for a whole
recompilation (AFAICR, the differents GUI of the debian distribution do
depend on the base package but are binary packages and mutually
independant and with no need to recompile the sources).

> sdl: the source code is targeted at freebsd not linux, to build in
> linux, edit (nethack|slashem)/sys/unix/Makefile.src and search replace
> " sdl11-config " with "sdl-config"

That would definitively be the kind of stuff you should put in the INSTALL
file 🙂
(maybe copy/paste it asap in order to avoid reanswering the same
questions/retyping the same stuff many time)

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Clive Crous wrote:
>
>
>>to build from source and install in the usual locations follow the
>>normal unix building instuctions for each of nethack and slashem as you
>>would when building their vanilla versions from source.
>
>
> Is it really necessary to have nethack|slash'em sources as well as
> Vulture's * ?

yes, for now, jaako made many changes to the nethack source itself in
falcons eye, which i had to carry over to slashem too to get it to work.

aside from the non-standard changes however, it's the nature of the
nethack ui interface that you *HAVE* to at least make minimal changes to
the origional variant. Thats a question better asked of the devteam ..
why ?

Naively, I would have think that the GUI only interprets
> stuff from the program and send stuff to it without need for a whole
> recompilation (AFAICR, the differents GUI of the debian distribution do
> depend on the base package but are binary packages and mutually
> independant and with no need to recompile the sources).

yes of course, and if someone make a deb package of vultures, the same
will appl

>
>
>>sdl: the source code is targeted at freebsd not linux, to build in
>>linux, edit (nethack|slashem)/sys/unix/Makefile.src and search replace
>>" sdl11-config " with "sdl-config"
>
>
> That would definitively be the kind of stuff you should put in the INSTALL
> file 🙂
> (maybe copy/paste it asap in order to avoid reanswering the same
> questions/retyping the same stuff many time)

I agree

>
> Hypocoristiquement,
> Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Clive Crous wrote:

> Jym wrote:

> > Is it really necessary to have nethack|slash'em sources as well as
> > Vulture's * ?
>
> yes, for now, jaako made many changes to the nethack source itself in
> falcons eye, which i had to carry over to slashem too to get it to work.
>
> aside from the non-standard changes however, it's the nature of the
> nethack ui interface that you *HAVE* to at least make minimal changes to
> the origional variant. Thats a question better asked of the devteam ..
> why ?

Well, I don't know anything about nethack sources, but I must confess I
still don't understand why those changes in the sources are needed for a
GUI.

I would think that nethack send some strings (or similar stuff, what is
usually writtent on screen) and read some strings and by piping stdin and
stdout you could sens the correct orders...

Do you have some concrets small exmaples of what kind of changes in the
sources have to be made ?

(in case my message is not clear, I'm absolutely not doubting you in the
fact that these changes are nedeed, I'm just curious about them)

Hypocoristiquement,
Jym.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym schreef:
>
> Well, I don't know anything about nethack sources, but I must confess I
> still don't understand why those changes in the sources are needed for a
> GUI.
>
> I would think that nethack send some strings (or similar stuff, what is
> usually writtent on screen) and read some strings and by piping stdin and
> stdout you could sens the correct orders...
>
> Do you have some concrets small exmaples of what kind of changes in the
> sources have to be made ?
>
> (in case my message is not clear, I'm absolutely not doubting you in the
> fact that these changes are nedeed, I'm just curious about them)
>
> Hypocoristiquement,
> Jym.

Well, consider a stack of objects, for one. Say, there is some gold on a
staircase, and you're standing on top of that. You would want to see all
three, not only the character. It would take far too much time to have
the graphical interface query each square (with ";" or ":", for example)
before it would be able to draw the screen.

And the interface needs to "know" what it is doing in either case, so it
can pop up a message box, for example. It is far easier to intercept the
function calls in the source than parsing all the output all the time.
And there already is a mechanism to have a separate interface handle the
display and I/O anyway. It just wasn't made with an isometric 3D
interface in mind.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.games.roguelike.nethack (More info?)

Jym wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2005, Clive Crous wrote:
>
>
>>Jym wrote:
>
>
>>>Is it really necessary to have nethack|slash'em sources as well as
>>>Vulture's * ?
>>
>>yes, for now, jaako made many changes to the nethack source itself in
>>falcons eye, which i had to carry over to slashem too to get it to work.
>>
>>aside from the non-standard changes however, it's the nature of the
>>nethack ui interface that you *HAVE* to at least make minimal changes to
>>the origional variant. Thats a question better asked of the devteam ..
>>why ?
>
>
> Well, I don't know anything about nethack sources, but I must confess I
> still don't understand why those changes in the sources are needed for a
> GUI.
>
> I would think that nethack send some strings (or similar stuff, what is
> usually writtent on screen) and read some strings and by piping stdin and
> stdout you could sens the correct orders...
>
> Do you have some concrets small exmaples of what kind of changes in the
> sources have to be made ?
>
> (in case my message is not clear, I'm absolutely not doubting you in the
> fact that these changes are nedeed, I'm just curious about them)
>

at the lowest barest minimum level look at the top of nethack/src/windows.c:

....
#ifdef BEOS_GRAPHICS

extern struct window_procs beos_procs;

extern void NDECL(be_win_init);

#endif

#ifdef AMIGA_INTUITION

extern struct window_procs amii_procs;

extern struct window_procs amiv_procs;

extern void NDECL(ami_wininit_data);

#endif

#ifdef WIN32_GRAPHICS

extern struct window_procs win32_procs;

#endif

#ifdef GNOME_GRAPHICS

#include "winGnome.h"

extern struct window_procs Gnome_procs;

#endif

#ifdef MSWIN_GRAPHICS

extern struct window_procs mswin_procs;

#endif

....

you need to define the interface, each interface does this

if you want an in depth explanation, read nethack/doc/windows.doc

not to mention adding the interface's source code files to
nethack/slashem's makefiles

> Hypocoristiquement,
> Jym.