| |
CreaMD
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 2964 |
Converting GFX question
Asking for friend. Quote follows:
---
Morning! Does anyone of you please know a Window C64 converter that would not do any processing and just save data in C64 format?
What's my problem: I prepared a 4-color (so that I can convert to multicolor sprites) picture in Gimp and then ran it through a converter, which decided to just add a 5th color. 🤦♂️
---
Thank you for quick help everybody. |
|
... 31 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
hedning
Registered: Mar 2009
Posts: 4151 |
Refusing to learn stuff is just lazy. Of course it's easier to demand a dragndrop thing than to spend 5 minutes learning how to use command prompt things. But cmon. It's not rocket science. I don't buy the "fact" that someone is completely unabled to use or learn how to use a command prompt. Except for my dad. Actually he should not be allowed to own a computer at all. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 4844 |
Quote: Quoting WotnauAs it looks like it needs command line input, I won't be able to use it (see my post on use case and user above), but if someone more PC literate finds this thread later, it may serve them just great. :) Come on, what's so hard about using the command line to run a program with a few simple options? :)
ask anyone who tried to compile your loader and failed =) |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2531 |
Quoting Oswaldask anyone who tried to compile your loader and failed =) Strawman argument. Using a precompiled tool like Burglar's has a lot fewer likely breaking points than building something yourself. =)
(Besides, some people were quite delighted how easy building the loader is once you have the dependencies in place and know how those standard tools like make etc. work. =D) |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 4844 |
Quote: Quoting Oswaldask anyone who tried to compile your loader and failed =) Strawman argument. Using a precompiled tool like Burglar's has a lot fewer likely breaking points than building something yourself. =)
(Besides, some people were quite delighted how easy building the loader is once you have the dependencies in place and know how those standard tools like make etc. work. =D)
nope, thats not a strawman. also that it needs a precompiled tool and dependencies and learning make just proves my point. its not about saying your loader sucks, I view it as one of the biggest achievment of mankind, just showing how complicated CLI can be. |
| |
Jetboy
Registered: Jul 2006
Posts: 186 |
They can be complicated, but it's not the case this time.
What triggers me are people who ask for help, and when they get it they start to moan that they won't use it because some stupid excuse. |
| |
Groepaz
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 10579 |
Quote:just showing how complicated CLI can be.
LOL. Supposed coders and their fear of commandlines. |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 961 |
Quoting Oswald.. that it needs a precompiled tool and dependencies and learning make just proves my point.. You are mixing things up. png2prg 1.2 is the precompiled tool that will run an any OS, it has literally zero dependencies, it's static binary.
Just run "png2prg.exe bla.png" and you will get a bla.prg with the gfx data (koala, hires, chars or sprites).
For compiling Krilllloader, you need dependencies installed, not to be compared with a simple gfx converter.
jeugd 1 - burg 1 (hijacking thread succeeded;) |
| |
Cruzer
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1020 |
Quote:Supposed coders and their fear of commandlines. Using commandlines != coding though. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 4844 |
I apologize for not reading through the thread just jumping on a post randomly. |
| |
Burglar
Registered: Dec 2004
Posts: 961 |
Quote: Quote:Supposed coders and their fear of commandlines. Using commandlines != coding though.
I disagree, bash is turing-complete :) |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 - Next |
