Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

After experimenting with the options, how is 40d13? Problems only count if the defaults don't work.

Faster than 40d, no problems
- 42 (26.1%)
Faster than 40d, problems
- 72 (44.7%)
No slower than 40d, no problems
- 14 (8.7%)
No slower than 40d, problems
- 16 (9.9%)
Slower than 40d, no problems
- 2 (1.2%)
Slower than 40d, problems
- 3 (1.9%)
Doesn't work (please explain)
- 12 (7.5%)

Total Members Voted: 160


Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 147

Author Topic: FotF: Help test the output code for the next version of DF (40d13)  (Read 373771 times)

burlingk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #900 on: February 09, 2009, 07:30:58 am »

Well, yeah, but you're supposed to run the scripts, not dwarfort.exe directly. :P

I named it that specifically *because* unix users tend to assume executables shouldn't really be named .exe. Perhaps I should put it in a libexec subdirectory instead.

P.S.

The Linux version works greate once all the dependencies are in place!!!! :-) I finally can play without wine.
Logged

Baughn

  • Noble Phantasm
  • The Haruhiist
  • Hiss
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #901 on: February 09, 2009, 02:48:05 pm »

I am running the Linux version nothte OS X Version.  There is no script.  Again though, the .exe was kind of a stylistic issue.  The fmodex issue is the real potential bug.  :)

Sure there is.
The script should unpack as df_linux/df.
Logged
C++ makes baby Cthulhu weep. Why settle for the lesser horror?

bhelyer

  • Bay Watcher
  • The kart iz not movink!
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #902 on: February 09, 2009, 03:44:49 pm »

Well, yeah, but you're supposed to run the scripts, not dwarfort.exe directly. :P

I named it that specifically *because* unix users tend to assume executables shouldn't really be named .exe. Perhaps I should put it in a libexec subdirectory instead.

I am running the Linux version nothte OS X Version.  There is no script.  Again though, the .exe was kind of a stylistic issue.  The fmodex issue is the real potential bug.  :)


We ship with FmodEx - where's the bug?

EDIT: Oh I see, you haven't been running the script. The script is the df file. The important line in there is:

export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:"./libs"

Which says "look for dynamic libraries (like FmodEx) in the libs folder above me.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 03:47:01 pm by bhelyer »
Logged

zagibu

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #903 on: February 09, 2009, 04:30:43 pm »

Wow, I've just now discovered this, and I must say, GREAT WORK! It runs faster on my linux laptop than 40d on my gaming-powerhouse. Terrific.
Logged
99 barrels of beer in the pile
99 barrels of beer!
If some dwarves know the way to the pile
0 barrels of beer in the pile!

burlingk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #904 on: February 09, 2009, 07:03:56 pm »

Well, yeah, but you're supposed to run the scripts, not dwarfort.exe directly. :P

I named it that specifically *because* unix users tend to assume executables shouldn't really be named .exe. Perhaps I should put it in a libexec subdirectory instead.

I am running the Linux version nothte OS X Version.  There is no script.  Again though, the .exe was kind of a stylistic issue.  The fmodex issue is the real potential bug.  :)


We ship with FmodEx - where's the bug?

EDIT: Oh I see, you haven't been running the script. The script is the df file. The important line in there is:

export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$LD_LIBRARY_PATH:"./libs"

Which says "look for dynamic libraries (like FmodEx) in the libs folder above me.

I will redownload it when I get home and double check.  I had looked for the presense of the script, but it is possible that I messed something up.  :-)  User error is always a possability.

Again, I like the results so far.


P.S.  I figured out what went wrong.  The problem with not finding the script was indeed my fault.  :-)  I will give it a try when I get home!

« Last Edit: February 09, 2009, 08:19:41 pm by burlingk »
Logged

Gorjo MacGrymm

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #905 on: February 10, 2009, 10:24:26 pm »

For the sake of a list,

I installed d9, using all maydays graphics/changes (took a little while too make sure I had all the right files where they are supposed to go) and I am having no problems.  I used a 6x6 on an EXTREME Cliff face (15 plus levels) and was hovering at about 90 fps.

I went to a flat area (completely flat) with about 40 lakes in a 6x6 and hovered between 130-200 (cap is set to 200).  Dont know what made it jump down to 130, except that it seemed to happen when I dug down to the next z level.

just FYI

GMcG
Logged
"You should stop cutting down all these herr trees, or, MAN is my Queen going to be Aaaaa-aang-Re-ee with you guys!" flipping his hand and batting his eyelashes."
"Oh my god guys, wood, is like, totally murder."

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #906 on: February 10, 2009, 11:48:32 pm »

For the sake of a list,

I installed d9, using all maydays graphics/changes (took a little while too make sure I had all the right files where they are supposed to go) and I am having no problems.  I used a 6x6 on an EXTREME Cliff face (15 plus levels) and was hovering at about 90 fps.

I went to a flat area (completely flat) with about 40 lakes in a 6x6 and hovered between 130-200 (cap is set to 200).  Dont know what made it jump down to 130, except that it seemed to happen when I dug down to the next z level.

just FYI

GMcG
I think that has more to do with Toady's pathfinding algorithm... regular DF does this as well when you have pathing of several z-levels.
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

batbat

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #907 on: February 12, 2009, 08:49:45 am »

It crashes at startup :'(
"Illegal instruction"
Really looking forward to this

System information report, generated by Sysinfo: 2/12/2009 3:46:39 PM
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gsysinfo

SYSTEM INFORMATION
   Running Ubuntu Linux, the Ubuntu 8.04 (hardy) release.
   GNOME: 2.22.3 (Ubuntu 2008-07-09)
   Kernel version: 2.6.24-23-generic (#1 SMP Thu Nov 27 18:44:42 UTC 2008)
   GCC: 4.2.4 (i486-linux-gnu)
   Xorg: unknown (13 June 2008  01:08:21AM) (13 June 2008  01:08:21AM)
   Hostname: Hannah
   Uptime: 0 days 1 h 14 min

CPU INFORMATION
   AuthenticAMD, AMD Athlon(tm) processor
   Number of CPUs: 1
   CPU clock currently at 749.667 MHz with 256 KB cache
   Numbering: family(6) model(4) stepping(2)
   Bogomips: 1501.19
   Flags: fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr syscall mmxext 3dnowext 3dnow up

MEMORY INFORMATION
   Total memory: 376 MB
   Total swap: 854 MB

STORAGE INFORMATION
   SCSI device -  scsi0
      Vendor:  ATA     
      Model:  Maxtor 2B020H1   
   SCSI device -  scsi0
      Vendor:  ATA     
      Model:  ST3160815A       
   SCSI device -  scsi1
      Vendor:  PHILIPS 
      Model:  CDRWDVD2010     

HARDWARE INFORMATION
MOTHERBOARD
   Host bridge
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super ACPI] (rev 40)
   PCI bridge(s)
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT8363/8365 [KT133/KM133 AGP] (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
   USB controller(s)
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82xxxxx UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 16) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82xxxxx UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 16) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82xxxxx UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 62) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82xxxxx UHCI USB 1.1 Controller (rev 62) (prog-if 00 [UHCI])
      VIA Technologies, Inc. USB 2.0 (rev 65) (prog-if 20 [EHCI])
   ISA bridge
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 [Apollo Super South] (rev 40)
      Subsystem: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686/A PCI to ISA Bridge
   IDE interface
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C586A/B/VT82C686/A/B/VT823x/A/C PIPC Bus Master IDE (rev 06) (prog-if 8a [Master SecP PriP])

GRAPHIC CARD
   VGA controller
      nVidia Corporation NV11 [GeForce2 MX/MX 400] (rev a1) (prog-if 00 [VGA controller])
      Subsystem: CardExpert Technology Unknown device 0001

SOUND CARD
   Multimedia controller
      VIA Technologies, Inc. VT82C686 AC97 Audio Controller (rev 50)
      Subsystem: Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-6330 Onboard Audio
Logged

Baughn

  • Noble Phantasm
  • The Haruhiist
  • Hiss
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #908 on: February 12, 2009, 12:10:27 pm »

Your computer is too old.
You need SSE support.. or possibly SSE2 support... at any rate, it's too old; you'd get twice the framerate from a $100 upgrade anyway.

EDIT: Possibly. The real issue is that it's built with the P3 as the baseline requirement; anything older than that (such as yours) won't work, and it did introduce more improvements than just SSE.
Logged
C++ makes baby Cthulhu weep. Why settle for the lesser horror?

nataq

  • Bay Watcher
  • Atheist
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #909 on: February 13, 2009, 07:30:29 am »

athlon 64 x2 @ 3000mhz, radeon hd4850

center of the fort, 100 dorfs, 1280x1024 resolution, 16x16 graphic set

before : 30-40fps

now 50-60fps

in pause mode 130fps
Logged
"If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religious people."

Feldrin

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #910 on: February 13, 2009, 02:30:58 pm »

I'll test that on an actual windows XP install tomorrow, but that seems very odd to me.

When you just double-click on an executable, it'll run with your privileges. When you right-click, run as, actual user... it'll still run with your privileges. I don't see how it could change anything.

Now that is interesting and confusing. I've got a new laptop and this version runs perfectly there. And it also runs great on the Vista installed on my old PC, I've still got the non-working Windows XP version running as well though. And strangely enough, instead of the olde 50% CPU and nothing else-o, with this method I'm getting specific error messages.

First I get a crash, because I don't seem to have 'fmodex.dll'. So, I spotted that this .dll comes with the download of the game already, and I copy that into my System32 folder. Then I get the message that 'zlib1.dll' wasn't found. Copy paste. After going through the same workout for SDL.dll and SDL_image.dll I get stopped by the error (0xc0000022). The only difference I can spot in the 'run as' screen is the option to '"Protect my computer and data from unauthorized program activity". Once I switch that off, I'm getting the usual 50% nothing.

Now, I don't really need a fix anymore because on any other version of Windows that wasn't toyed around with this thing works like a dwarf on booze. But I just thought that I'd give this method a try and see what rolls out. Hope it helps, somehow.
Logged

Baughn

  • Noble Phantasm
  • The Haruhiist
  • Hiss
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #911 on: February 13, 2009, 03:31:42 pm »

Looking through google, that problem seems to occur if you install MS security updates while the system is in an inconsistent state.

In other words: If you use nLite to any large degree, or otherwise mess around with the system, don't run windows update.
Logged
C++ makes baby Cthulhu weep. Why settle for the lesser horror?

Feldrin

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #912 on: February 14, 2009, 12:17:52 pm »

Cool, cause that's precisely what I did, updated and installed whatever available patch/fix/upgrade there was. So I guess that solves why it doesn't work for people with nLite'd Windows'es or something similar. Good to know.
Logged

alpha

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #913 on: February 14, 2009, 04:08:09 pm »

pc: Gentoo Linux, Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU E8200 @ 2.66GHz, 2Gb RAM, nvidia 8600GT + binary linux drivers v.177.82
df: 20x24 lucida console based tiles (thom set) @ 84x43 grid @ 1680x1050

on a medium sized area (5x5)
pause mode: 100 fps
up to 80-90 dwarwes: 100 fps
90-140 dwarwes: around 50 fps
150+ dwarwes: zomg slow.
Logged

mission0

  • Bay Watcher
  • He is on a mission!
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the fort: Help test the output code for the next version of DF
« Reply #914 on: February 14, 2009, 10:33:56 pm »

Oddly everytime i minimize df the computer freezes and won't respond to anything I do other than shutting it down and starting it back up.

running with

Microsoft Xp Service pack 2

Mobile Amd sempron
processor 3100+
1.80 ghz, 960 mb of ram
Logged
Oh wait, "insane" doesn't work on this forum.
Crap, can't think of an alternative.
Pages: 1 ... 59 60 [61] 62 63 ... 147