| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
x64 vs x64sc, drive emulation
I'm taking a break from shitposting about assembler syntax to do some actual development, and I just noticed that the fastloader I'm working on works under x64sc but fails under x64 (vice-2.4). Should I care? Just wondering if it means my timing's too tight to be reliable on a range of real drives..
(yes yes, I'll dig some actual hardware out tomorrow to see if it works on the real thing, and I'm also having another attempt at building vice from a source tree. I'll do some emu maintenance one of these years..)
edit- and yes, I had true drive emulation enabled in both. |
|
... 29 posts hidden. Click here to view all posts....
|
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
Wait, there's still meant to be a ./configure? I can see one in the sources for vice-2.2 and vice-2.3, but not in the nightly.
was about to have another run at making sense of the build scripts in build/macosx |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
if you checked out the svn version, first run ./autogen.sh - that creates the configure scripts |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
Ah! Thank you. It's a while since I've built anything nontrivial without using a package manager. Not familiar with autogen.
I've now successfully built a binary that, um, crashes on launch. Still, something to debug. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
<abo> vice Jun-25 00:48: gpz * r31325 - /trunk/vice/src/arch/unix/ps-ieee1284.c: fix segfault
:=) |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
..and now I've installed some more stuff and am passing sensible values to arch/unix/macosx/make-bindist.sh I finally have a recent OS X cocoa build.
Turns out Jam Ball 2 doesn't work in x64 either, and I know that one at least works on real hardware, so I'm going to stick my fingers in my ears and use x64sc for now.
On the plus side, I can have another run at adding "OS X port maintainer" to my list of hats. Thinking of ditching the OS X+X11 build, mind. |
| |
chatGPZ
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 11386 |
a lot of stuff doesnt work in x64, there is really no good reason to not use x64sc on a PC these days. |
| |
ChristopherJam
Registered: Aug 2004
Posts: 1409 |
Quote: a lot of stuff doesnt work in x64, there is really no good reason to not use x64sc on a PC these days.
I was about to say - just discovered Monochrome also doesn't work in x64.
Off to the glue factory! |
| |
iAN CooG
Registered: May 2002
Posts: 3194 |
Quote: I was about to say - just discovered Monochrome also doesn't work in x64.
Off to the glue factory!
what? works perfecly fine here in x64.exe |
| |
MagerValp
Registered: Dec 2001
Posts: 1078 |
Quoting ChristopherJamOn the plus side, I can have another run at adding "OS X port maintainer" to my list of hats.
😘
Quote:Thinking of ditching the OS X+X11 build, mind.
Kill it with fire. |
| |
Oswald
Registered: Apr 2002
Posts: 5094 |
"what? works perfecly fine here in x64.exe"
+1 |
| Previous - 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 - Next |
