Re: Warzone 2100 packaging status report
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Eddy Petrișor wrote:
>> would consider versioned build-conflicts a cleaner solution.
>
> WHAT?
> I really don't understand where from did you get this type awry thinking. This is plain backwards thinking!
Yeah, I sometimes do that. :)
> Please look in the policy for the definition for B-conflicts and b-deps.
I did, but I probably misinterpreted what it actually says.
I still do not like the way this works, but as long as it does work, it
is fine with me. (as in "I put the dependency back")
>> some patches that are said to bring initial support for 64-bit systems,
>> but I have not yet managed to find out where they ended up. Will try the
>> latest SVN some time later this week.
>
> Just tell me when I can try. If it doesn't work, I might work (depending on how much I like the game ;-) on completing
> the patches .
A pleasant surprise, the latest SVN almost works. There still is 100%
crash possibility (has something to do with damage calculations), but
otherwise runs fine (as long as nothing gets damaged).
I did have time to do the bughunting yet, but I prepared the updated
packages (in SVN). Maybe we should upload them to experimental? The game
is perfectly stable on 32-bit systems after all.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFGNIN2ztOe9mov/y4RAl/XAJ4mzo+dVBsrHeGUcenKW8+ye8M9iACeIrV9
G5uhlQROTewMALQr/J8U0Gg=
=YIDj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: