| |
Shadow
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 355 |
IRQ-loader toolchain for KickAss/Windows?
So, the one and only time I tried making an IRQ-loading demo I swore I would never, ever try that again.
Now I guess the memory has faded enough that I'm perhaps starting to reconsider! :)
Back then I used Dreamload and Exomizer, however putting it together was a complete pain in the ass.
I don't recall exactly what the trouble was, but I think it was the fact that the de-exomizer needed to point to the end of the packed data, which meant I had to compile the parts I wanted to load, exomize them, manually note the lengths, and then enter that length in another source where I had the general part-loader as indata to the deexomizer. Every little change meant redoing that procedure since the packed length always differed a bit.
Has anyone some more plug-and-play-ready solutions? I know there is lft's Spindle system, but that seems a bit too specific in the way you have to do things, and also kind of Linux-centric.
I would prefer working from Windows and using KickAssembler. |
|
... 62 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Quoting KrillQuoting Burglarin speed only surpassed by bitfire I should really finish that new release, oh my... :)
But i believe that lft's Spindle system is faster as well, and i wouldn't be surprised if it'd best Bitfire in speed. Any stats? :)
I'd love to have compareable figures from spindle, but it was too much hassle for me to build a testcase with it. I guess it is slightly faster but compresses worse and thus loads again longer. Also memory footprint on c64 side is bigger.
And now deliver your new version, go! go! go! :-) |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Quote: That said, having the fastest loading speed is a bit overrated. The top average speeds are fairly close, and most productions don't really need the fastest one. Plus achieving them requires a fair bit of inside knowledge, and more often than not people pick the purportedly fastest loader and then do something wrong, ending up on some speed many other loaders can achieve as well. End of rant. :)
No. :-) |
| |
HCL
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 728 |
Oh, you forget the toolchain that is used in most top-10 productions already: ByteBoozer and the BoozeLoader :). Well tested in real life situations by top demos for 10-15 years by now!! Now with ByteBoozer2.0 you don't need to be afraid to be slower or larger than any of the other oh so popular systems, just chill and let the slim code do the job for you :).
Bb2.0 is not yet out for grabs though, but will be soon. You can of course have a pre-release if you ask me kindly ;). |
| |
Shadow
Account closed
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 355 |
Ideally I would like to have something that allows me to work kind of like this from a .BAT-file (yeah, I still use those!)
<compile a bunch of files using Kickass>
<pack each file using PACKERTOOL_XXX>
<make a D64 of all files using D64TOOL_YYY>
Then in my main program I want to be able to do something like:
jsr initloader
..
lda/ldx/ldy #SOME_REFERENCE_TO_PART1
jsr load_and_decrunch_at_the_same_time
jsr part1
lda/ldx/ldy #SOME_REFERENCE_TO_PART2
jsr load_and_decrunch_at_the_same_time
jsr part2
I have taken a look at all the suggestions that have been posted so far (with the exception of HCLs stuff, as it seems only the packer and not the loader is released from what I can find on CSDb) and both Bitfire and Krills loader seem to do pretty much what I want to.
I started with Krill as it got the most recommendations. Unfortunately I am lazy and the list of prereqs to compile the thing was a bit too much, as I would need to get cygwin and perl etc. etc. setup first.
I then moved on to Bitfire. I managed to compile win32 versions of both the d64write and bitnax utility, but now I need to download ACME and try to get the files assembled without access to all the sed-magic that the Makefile uses. Another day maybe.
I know I am a bit of a grumpy old man, but I have never really seen the charm with the Linux way of doing things, with distributing sources and makefiles and always having to build everything from scratch when you want to use it. |
| |
HCL
Registered: Feb 2003
Posts: 728 |
Well, you really seem to need my stuff.. :). But I'll talk you later, have to go sleep now.. |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Quoting BitbreakerAnd now deliver your new version, go! go! go! :-) I'm working on a patch release to fix a few bugs and make it compatible with recent versions of cc65/ca65/ld65 again and drop the dreadful Java and Dosbox (for Levelcrush) dependencies. New features and speed improvements will only be contained in the release after that, and who knows when i'll come around to finally do all that. |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Quote: Oh, you forget the toolchain that is used in most top-10 productions already: ByteBoozer and the BoozeLoader :). Well tested in real life situations by top demos for 10-15 years by now!! Now with ByteBoozer2.0 you don't need to be afraid to be slower or larger than any of the other oh so popular systems, just chill and let the slim code do the job for you :).
Bb2.0 is not yet out for grabs though, but will be soon. You can of course have a pre-release if you ask me kindly ;).
Bla bla bla, share and compare your penis or gtfo :-P |
| |
Bitbreaker
Registered: Oct 2002
Posts: 508 |
Quoting Shadow
I then moved on to Bitfire. I managed to compile win32 versions of both the d64write and bitnax utility, but now I need to download ACME and try to get the files assembled without access to all the sed-magic that the Makefile uses. Another day maybe.
I know I am a bit of a grumpy old man, but I have never really seen the charm with the Linux way of doing things, with distributing sources and makefiles and always having to build everything from scratch when you want to use it.
Well, try to pretty print the labels for other assemblers without any tools but just with a .bat :-) That is what the sed wizardry is for, you can of course just pick the needed labels by hand and adapt them, no need to use the Makefile.
I'm aware that KickAss is offering the possibilities to do all this within an assembler, but well, that would fill again another thread about why that might be a good or bad idea :-)
Distributed sources allow to understand mechanisms and allows one to add own changes easily. I could of course just release a installer and resident part with a fixed address and let it up to you to relocate :-D Also it gives people to continue the work or fix bugs if a project is abandoned or if there's no feedback form the developer in time.
When you compiled acme finally, stick to it, it's worth it :-D |
| |
Krill
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 2980 |
Quoting HCLOh, you forget the toolchain that is used in most top-10 productions already: ByteBoozer and the BoozeLoader :) ... and this is a very dubious claim as well. Unless you mean the top-10 Booze productions, which would make this a bit of a tautology. :) |
| |
Flavioweb
Registered: Nov 2011
Posts: 463 |
I think that Cadaver loader could be a good choice.
Is fully customizable, support exomizer ad pucrunch in any version and with all possible configuration.
Usually i use Cadaver loader, with 2bit protocol, and exomize my files simply with the "level" parameter, setting the loader configs accordingly.
To create the disk image, cc1541 could be a good choice too. Need some little bugfix to manage BAM correctly but you notice it only if you need to save on disks, but it's a nice tool since you can change files interleave quickly.
Create a chain with these tools and with your fave compiler, it's quite an easy task, both if you choose batch or make files to do it.
If you want to go a little deeper, using *nix power in a windows world, you should think to install cygwin.
With cygwin you can compile sources for windows and use makefiles as on native *nix system, but using your files in/for windows.
Just my 2 cents... |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 - Next |
