[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#670195: RFS: lierolibre/0.1-1

On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 7:50 AM, Martin Erik Werner wrote:

> Via autoreconf you mean? I'll look into that.


> Well the zlib is unused, (and now deleted). I was not aware of libpcl
> and libtut, I'll have a look at ripping those out as well.
> Hmm, I though I removed that since I found it non-free... Anyways, it's
> not used in any of the resulting binaries, and now deleted.


> Yeah, the native game resolution is 320x200 pixels, and anything else is
> scaled. Both nearest and scale2X are available currently, toggled via
> the [F1] in-game menu.
> I think I've got a reasonable hack setting it to 800x500 (x2.5) for now,
> though the code that handles the resolution is somewhat of a mystery to
> me at the moment.
> One can also use:
> window-managers default maximise method (alt+F10, double-click title,
> maximise button)
> F6 to get 640x480, scaled
> F5 to get fullscreen, scaled
> Unfortunately all higher resolutions seem to add unneeded bordering...

IIRC with X11 there are hints you can send to the WM to prevent users
from being able to resize to particular sizes, that might be useful to
get rid of the bordering.

Also, I encountered a couple of segfaults when resizing, one in
scale2x mode when resizing the window less than
 320x200. The other was random while scaling in scale2x mode.

> I disagree on this, Since control, alt and shift are used wasd becomes
> very cumbersome. For singleplayer I personally use ijkl and asd for
> actions, but that's also quite odd, and inappropriate for splitscreen,
> so I think it makes best sense to keep the LIERO default here.

Hmm, ok.

> Do you mean the one for Player2? Yeah, that's the default case for me
> as well, though I suspect that that's due to me having Alt Gr instead
> of LAlt, and I'm not sure if it's possible to support both, I'll have
> to look into that..

Yep, thanks.

>> Why the dpkg predepends?
> Hmm, since I am (or at least should be) using xz compression for the
> packages?


> Ah, I haven't looked at autotools from a Debian perspective enough it
> seems, thanks for the hint.

I don't think there are many Debian folks who would suggest this.



Reply to: