Page 3 of 4

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Tue Sep 13, 2016 6:41 pm
by Torr Samaho
Yrvyne wrote:My reasoning for the Installation script was that compiling might not have been enough because I was observing the log having such output as [100%] Generating ../zandronum.pk3 and the wiki explanation saying Copy zandronum, zandronum.pk3, skulltag_actors.pk3, liboutput_sdl.so, zandronum-server and libfmodex64-4.24.16.so or libfmodex-4.24.16.so to /usr/games/zandronum.
I'd say the Wiki is misleading here. You should be able to run the compiled binaries without copying them anywhere. It would be terrible for development, if you couldn't run the binaries on the spot, but have to install them first.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 9:17 am
by Yrvyne
Ah I see, so I was incorrect in saying that the Installation part was necessary.

Since I am now able to play PB (and other Z3A compatible mods), how can I be of help?
I previously read that Zandronum is more or less stable and that more testers are required to transition from its current state to stable.
Is there anything specific in the ways of testing it?

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 2:34 pm
by Sean
Yrvyne wrote: Is there anything specific in the ways of testing it?
1. Play Zandronum
2. Find bugs
3. Report bugs
4. Wait for fix
5. Test fix
6. goto 1

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 3:02 pm
by Yrvyne
Sean wrote:1. Play Zandronum
2. Find bugs
3. Report bugs
4. Wait for fix
5. Test fix
6. goto 1
Now you decide to reply???

Very helpful indeed.

I would have appreciated if you had guided me more a little while back rather than leaving me stranded to fend for myself.

Took me 4 days to realise my misguidedness. So much for being in a community.

Alas, thanks nonetheless.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 3:45 pm
by Ænima
Yrvyne wrote:
Sean wrote:1. Play Zandronum
2. Find bugs
3. Report bugs
4. Wait for fix
5. Test fix
6. goto 1
Now you decide to reply???

Very helpful indeed.

I would have appreciated if you had guided me more a little while back rather than leaving me stranded to fend for myself.

Took me 4 days to realise my misguidedness. So much for being in a community.
The community is tiny and our forums are pretty dead compared to some others you may use. Users not responding for days is pretty common.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 3:56 pm
by Yrvyne
Ænima wrote:Users not responding for days is pretty common.
You forgot to mention users who do not reply at all or eventually reply with meaningless sarcasm.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:57 pm
by Torr Samaho
Yrvyne wrote:You forgot to mention users who do not reply at all or eventually reply with meaningless sarcasm.
Please don't be discouraged by Sean's wording. The easiest way to help us with testing is actually to play your favorite mods with the latest 3.0 alpha (preferably online with several people) and report any bugs you encounter. If you want to go beyond that, you can go to the tracker, look for tickets with status "needs testing " and check whether the corresponding bugs are fixed (may involve compiling the latest version from the source repository). If you want to do even more, I can certainly find more advanced tasks :).

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 10:04 pm
by Yrvyne
Yes, understood. I am playing my favs and anything I find buggy is usually a setting tweak here and there. I have tried Brutal Doom, Project Brutality, and Insanity's Brutality. So far so good.

I'll have a look at the tracker and start playing online. The latter is not my favourite pastime but I want to commit myself and I'm not kidding, otherwise, I would have abandoned Zandronum just like I did with GZDoom.

In the meantime, and because it may involve compiling the latest version from the source repository, may I please ask directly
  1. if my scripts (zandronum_build.sh and zandronum_build_update.sh) are correct
  2. for guidance on the procedure to have two instances of Zandronium 3 Alpha.
    • One to be vanilla - in a manner of speaking
    • The other to be the testing platform
I know I can always use the -noautoload* and just write a bash script to load the required -iwad, -file(s) and other parameters but being able to do the above will definitely help.

* My current setup has [Doom.Autoload] loading Project Brutality, HQ Textures, HQ SFX and Taunts'n'OneLiners by default.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2016 10:20 pm
by Edward-san
Regarding the scripts, just my .02:
imho the install part should be split to a separate script, so that you can reduce the duplication in both zandronum_build and zandronum_build_update.
Also, I'd add as many early exits as possible in case an error happens in any step (for example the hg commands might fail in case there's a connection problem).

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Thu Sep 15, 2016 7:01 pm
by Torr Samaho
Yrvyne wrote: I'll have a look at the tracker and start playing online. The latter is not my favourite pastime but I want to commit myself and I'm not kidding, otherwise, I would have abandoned Zandronum just like I did with GZDoom.
If you prefer to play offline, it would already be helpful if you just play on your own local server instead of playing normal single player. Many problems only show up when playing on a server, even if it is only a local server on the same machine.
Yrvyne wrote: In the meantime, and because it may involve compiling the latest version from the source repository, may I please ask directly
  1. if my scripts (zandronum_build.sh and zandronum_build_update.sh) are correct
  2. for guidance on the procedure to have two instances of Zandronium 3 Alpha.
    • One to be vanilla - in a manner of speaking
    • The other to be the testing platform
First, I'd start by not trying to install the binary (you can remove all the installing from your scripts, or like Edward-san suggested move the installing to a separate script and just don't call that unless you really want to install a certain version of the binary), but running it directly from the directory where cmake put it. If you have that, you can have multiple build directories and thus multiple versions of the binary at once.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 6:03 pm
by Danfun64
Are there any plans to backport ZDoom 2.8.x's OpenAL support, or will that have to wait for Zandronum 4.0?

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 7:28 pm
by Sean
Danfun64 wrote:Are there any plans to backport ZDoom 2.8.x's OpenAL support, or will that have to wait for Zandronum 4.0?
Waiting for 4.0 is the way to go.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Fri Sep 16, 2016 9:46 pm
by Danfun64
...figures...

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Sat Sep 17, 2016 9:38 am
by Torr Samaho
Danfun64 wrote:...figures...
While there won't be OpenAL in 3.0, if you want a Zandronum testing binary with OpenAL now, the zdoom sync branch is fully up to date with GZDoom. I never compiled it with OpenAL, but the code is there.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:30 pm
by Fr3ak
What are the new names of the runes? When I tried to load it with a mod, it gave me "Parent type 'runehalfdamage' not found in HalfDamageProtection."

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 3:43 pm
by Torr Samaho
The rune names are unchanged, but the rune definitions have been moved to skulltag_actors.pk3. So you'll need to load the skulltag_actors.pk3 version that comes with 3.0 to get them.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 6:05 am
by President People
Any chance of a Mac build yet? There was mention of a pull request early in the thread, does that mean the wait is until next alpha release?

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 2:05 pm
by doomjoshuaboy
Yrvyne wrote:Silly me! I didn't realize I had to follow the update section of the wiki.
I uploaded an update script, as well.
The resultant log is here.
updated
Image

:igor: Thank you very much! :igor:

One thing: the build numbers are different - this thread title says 160814-2010 but the img title is 150308-2221.

Also, I did not imagine that compiling from source, would erase version 2.1.2. I should have probably used different directories, oh, well, I'll stick with this alpha and test it with Project Brutality since this was my intention in the first place.
Your updated compiler worked thanks a bunch!!!!!

Edit: thanks for another update of zan3.0.

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 4:26 pm
by Mr. Repo
I know this has been answered elsewhere, but I can't find it for the life of me so I'll just go ahead and ask: what is the ultimate ZDoom revision goal for 3.0? Are you guys going to keep it at the current revision, go for 2.8 or 2.8.1? I just want an idea of how far ahead to plan the couple of mods I'm working on in regard to available features.

Regardless, this stuff is great and I've definitely enjoyed the 3.0 builds that have been put out and I can't wait for the next one!

Re: Zandronum 3.0-alpha-160814-2010

Posted: Tue Sep 27, 2016 6:35 pm
by Torr Samaho
President People wrote:Any chance of a Mac build yet? There was mention of a pull request early in the thread, does that mean the wait is until next alpha release?
Blzut3 handles the Mac builds, so I'm not sure whether this pull request was only necessary for the Linux builds with an old GCC or also for Macs. I plan to make a new beta build during the weekend though, so the pull request will be resolved then.
Mr. Repo wrote:I know this has been answered elsewhere, but I can't find it for the life of me so I'll just go ahead and ask: what is the ultimate ZDoom revision goal for 3.0? Are you guys going to keep it at the current revision, go for 2.8 or 2.8.1? I just want an idea of how far ahead to plan the couple of mods I'm working on in regard to available features.
For 3.0 we'll keep the current ZDoom revision (which is in sync with GZDoom 1.8.6).
Mr. Repo wrote:Regardless, this stuff is great and I've definitely enjoyed the 3.0 builds that have been put out and I can't wait for the next one!
Thanks!