silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

last time I forked over to microsoft for c++ was a while ago, apparently. I have a visual c++ 6.0 cd "copyright 1985-1998" (though I thought I bought it this century, perhaps not).

so how painfully out of date is that compared to what, say, Mike is using to compile TCB?

--

apparently, I can download "visual c++ 2005 express edition" for free ( http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/visualc/default.aspx ), so then the alternate question is: how gimped is the free version compared to what I'd need to compile TCB?

--

I realize the 3.0.2 source isn't out yet, but would my time be wasted getting 2.0.x to compile? (i.e. have the third-party dependencies changed a lot? getting the right copies of those libraries installed so that the compiler can find them at the right time was the Big Blocker for me before -- if the libraries are essentially the same, then my time is well spent, if they've changed a lot, then I'd just be spinning my wheels)


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 04-30-2007 05:08 AM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
last time I forked over to microsoft for c++ was a while ago, apparently. I have a visual c++ 6.0 cd "copyright 1985-1998" (though I thought I bought it this century, perhaps not).

so how painfully out of date is that compared to what, say, Mike is using to compile TCB?

I'm still supporting compiling 3.0 using VS6. (I assume you mean Visual Studio 6 there.) Go ahead and use it to build 2.0 and 3.0. You'll need VS6 Service Pack 5 (6 recommended) to compile DROD.

apparently, I can download "visual c++ 2005 express edition" for free ( http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/visualc/default.aspx ), so then the alternate question is: how gimped is the free version compared to what I'd need to compile TCB?

That's the exact IDE I'm using to compile TCB for release, so this will be fine. (I often still run 3.0 in the VS6 debugger -- not because the VS6 debugger is better, but because there's one nasty run-time assertion failure that occurs in our pathmapping code the way we're building 3.0 in VS2005. I can explain it in more detail if you run into this issue, but in short, if you'll actually be using the debugger, just go with VS6 for now.)

It took me a day or so of puttering around to get things set up on my machine for DROD in VS2005, but I bet it would be about the same in VS6.

I realize the 3.0.2 source isn't out yet, but would my time be wasted getting 2.0.x to compile? (i.e. have the third-party dependencies changed a lot? getting the right copies of those libraries installed so that the compiler can find them at the right time was the Big Blocker for me before -- if the libraries are essentially the same, then my time is well spent, if they've changed a lot, then I'd just be spinning my wheels)

Yup, compiling 2.0 would be a Big Step toward compiling 3.0. 2.0 uses a nearly identical (sub)set of TPLs used in 3.0, so I'd say this is the way to go.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 04-30-2007 06:11 AM]

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

the cd literally says "visual c++ 6.0" with no mention of the word studio on it or the msdn cd that came with it. I assume its a partial version of studio in some way, though.


____________________________

AlefBet
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 979
Registered: 07-16-2003
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
the cd literally says "visual c++ 6.0" with no mention of the word studio on it or the msdn cd that came with it. I assume its a partial version of studio in some way, though.

Microsoft used to distribute their developer tools for the various languages separately. At some point, one of the (I assume marketing) Microsoft guys decided that they ought to try to leverage developers using one MS tool towards using several, and they started shipping and promoting Visual Studio to the exclusion of the individual tools. It was around the VC 6 era that this push started happening. I'd be surprised if you could buy any professional grade tools that post-dated Visual Studio 6 and weren't the bundle, but I believe Visual C++ 6.0 was routinely available separately towards the beginning of its life.

As a side note, the C++ implemented in VC 6 is badly out of date. It works for DROD, but any recent project that doesn't take some pain to retain compatibility with it will almost certainly be broken by it. (For-loop scoping alone will likely do that.) If your goal is to compile and tinker with DROD, it will do the job just fine, but if you want to do current C++ development, go with the newer MS tool. It's much more current.

____________________________
I was charged with conspiracy to commit jay-walking, and accessory to changing lanes without signaling after the fact .

++Adam H. Peterson

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

For now, since I'm not planning on spending a lot of time in the debugger, I'm going with the 2005 edition, yes.

I'm keeping copious notes as I go... I'll be posting them as they get more helpful.

(unless I shouldn't post such because Erik said "somewhere" (I know where but don't want to spoil anything) that getting drod to compile was supposed to be a barrier to entry for drod development)


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-07-2007 02:42 AM]

AlefBet
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 979
Registered: 07-16-2003
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
(unless I shouldn't post such because Erik said "somewhere" (I know where but don't want to spoil anything) that getting drod to compile was supposed to be a barrier to entry for drod development)

I say post away. We don't try to make it hard on people to build DROD, it just sort of works out that way. And in any event, I expect it will still be a technical enough process to be a baptism of fire, even with your notes.

____________________________
I was charged with conspiracy to commit jay-walking, and accessory to changing lanes without signaling after the fact .

++Adam H. Peterson

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

File: drod compile.txt (8.4 KB)
Downloaded 51 times.
License: Public Domain

okay, I think I'm to the "hard part", but could someone double check my progress so far? especially the end where I discuss the goal of the next steps?

(file has been added to thusly):

26. double-clicked Desktop\drod\ThirdParty\metakit-2.4.9.6\win\msvc70\mksrc.sln
    that brought up the "upgrade wizard" which I let run (with backups).
    in the resulting solution, I right-clicked the mkdll project and selected "build".
    it built with 5 warnings, it seems I'm now done with metakit:

* Metakit 2.4.9.5 (well, 2.4.9.6, anyway)
  lib: Desktop\drod\ThirdParty\metakit-2.4.9.6\builds
  include: Desktop\drod\ThirdParty\metakit-2.4.9.6\include

so much for the easy one.
jpeg, theora, and freetype don't have handy .slns,
and the .sln for libpng always breaks because it can't find "adler32.obj" anywhere.


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-06-2007 09:22 AM]

Briareos
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3516
Registered: 08-07-2005
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
jpeg, theora, and freetype don't have handy .slns,
and the .sln for libpng always breaks because it can't find "adler32.obj" anywhere.

That should be part of zlib, I think...

____________________________
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
R.I.P. Robert Feldhoff (1962-2009)

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

libpng comes with its own zlib, apparently, but that actually gives the same error (missing adler.obj) when I try to compile it. perhaps I'm misunderstanding and the zlib directory with libpng is really "an extension of zlib" ... and I didn't find an adler.obj in the zlib-precompiled thing I got (just a zlib1.dll)

---

now that I look closer, I think I was mistaken all along - I'm not interested in .dlls of these other packages, I'm interested in .libs for static inclusion.
(at heart, I'm a linux geek. I can understand this stuff for windows only by analogy. so far, my analogies are .obj = .o, .lib = .a, .dll = .so. but I could be wrong).



____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-06-2007 12:00 PM]

Briareos
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3516
Registered: 08-07-2005
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
(at heart, I'm a linux geek. I can understand this stuff for windows only by analogy. so far, my analogies are .obj = .o, .lib = .a, .dll = .so. but I could be wrong).

Nah, that's quite correct.

But if you're more at home in Linux, why aren't you building the Linux version?

np: Radical Face - Welcome Home (Ghost)

____________________________
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
R.I.P. Robert Feldhoff (1962-2009)

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

how else would I learn, except to explore where I'm not already comfortable?

--

I see the problem with building libpng now - it doesn't include zlib sources, it assumes you HAVE zlib sources (i.e. it's totally not set up itself to just include zlib.lib statically and call it a day)

--

gob. the zlib project wants to use something called "ml" to do something with assembler files, but VC express doesn't seem to support asm/include "ml". I got the "microsoft platform sdk" but that doesn't include ml, either. sigh.




____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-06-2007 07:46 PM]

Briareos
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3516
Registered: 08-07-2005
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
gob. the zlib project wants to use something called "ml" to do something with assembler files, but VC express doesn't seem to support asm/include "ml". I got the "microsoft platform sdk" but that doesn't include ml, either. sigh.

Nah, ml.exe is the Microsoft Assembler; it's included in my full version of VS2k5, but it doesn't seem to ship with the express edition... :/

I know it's included in the VC6 processor pack, maybe you can extract it from there?

np: Jimi Tenor & Kabu Kabu - Bedroom Eyes (Joystone)

____________________________
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
R.I.P. Robert Feldhoff (1962-2009)

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

File: drod compile.txt (13.3 KB)
Downloaded 45 times.
License: Public Domain

turns out I didn't need ml once I figured out how to set the build options to not use the ASM versions of those libraries (which is fine, ml kept breaking on some assembly it thought was bad).

Anyway - I got all the third party libs built.

I added a step 26 to download libogg -- even though this is just a transient dependency of DROD (I needed it to build libtheora), it seems odd to leave it out of the LEGAL.txt ?

libjpeg was the trickiest -- it didn't have a handy project file and instead I had to fiddle with dos env vars for a while to find nmake and its necessary shared libs/includes.

---

a little break now before I try to actually compile drod against all these things I just built. huffpuff. huffpuff.

so... do you really just add a billion "AdditionalIncludeDirectories" to your project properties? and how do you specify the libs? it seems like I couldn't find a "lib directories" option, so I have to name all the libs, instead?


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-07-2007 02:48 AM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

File: VS2005_Options.PNG (53 KB)
Downloaded 56 times.
License: Public Domain

silver wrote:
Anyway - I got all the third party libs built.

This is a BIG achievement. I'd say you're 90% done now. (And no cracks about the "other" 90% of the time!) I can empathize -- I want through all the same guff making project files that would work for building libjpeg and co. Having your instructions is quite a boon. How would you feel about me including a finished version in the source code archive?

I added a step 26 to download libogg -- even though this is just a transient dependency of DROD (I needed it to build libtheora), it seems odd to leave it out of the LEGAL.txt ?

Ooh, yeah. This should be included.

libjpeg was the trickiest -- it didn't have a handy project file and instead I had to fiddle with dos env vars for a while to find nmake and its necessary shared libs/includes.

I didn't use nmake -- just made my own workspace+project for libjpeg in visual studio and built the thing. How about I post the relevant files here (next post).

a little break now before I try to actually compile drod against all these things I just built. huffpuff. huffpuff.

Home stretch!

so... do you really just add a billion "AdditionalIncludeDirectories" to your project properties? and how do you specify the libs? it seems like I couldn't find a "lib directories" option, so I have to name all the libs, instead?

That's how I did it, except there is a Lib Directories option. See the attached image for doing this for includes and libraries in Visual Studio 2005 Express. Choose Tools->Options to get this dialog. (It's the same thing pretty much in VS6 as well.)

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 05-10-2007 07:35 AM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

File: jpeg-6b_projectFiles.rar (81 KB)
Downloaded 48 times.
License: Public Domain

My libjpeg workspace+project file (and the .lib for people who don't want to build it) for VS6.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

mrimer wrote:
How would you feel about me including a finished version in the source code archive?

I'll want to significantly edit to make it not so first-persony in that case

thanks for the help with the includes/libs and the project files for libjpeg (if I were more familiar with this tool, I'd've found that more convenient, I'm sure, but right now I'm just at the "use project files" stage ... nmake/env-vars were more like "home" (i.e. linux) to me)


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-10-2007 07:36 AM]

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

okay, I got the .exe built. here's where I am now:

Time to test.

40. I went http://www.caravelgames.com/distfiles/DRODTCBDemoSetup.exe and saved that file to the Desktop\drod folder
Then I clicked the installer but changed the install path to "C:\Documents and Settings\silver Harloe\Desktop\drod\Test Build Debug",
and changed the Start Menu folder to "DROD - TCB Test Build", and unclicked "create a desktop icon". When it was done installing,
I did not allow it to launch yet.
41. In the folder "C:\Documents and Settings\silver Harloe\Desktop\drod\Test Build Debug" I created a subfolder called "orig" and
moved drod.exe into it, then I copied in the drod.exe from "C:\Documents and Settings\silver Harloe\Desktop\drod\DROD30Source\DROD\Debug"

now I get the "need to upgrade your Data files" dialog, except all the buttons contain no text (presumably I'm missing string resources somewhere),
this is because the new drod.exe I have is for the 3.0.2r2 release (ugh), but my data files are for the 3.0.0 release.



____________________________

coppro
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1309
Registered: 11-24-2005
IP: Logged

Compile with the "-DPATCH" option.

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

File: drod compile.txt (24.3 KB)
Downloaded 74 times.
License: Public Domain

great, well, here's my 42 part diary which goes from blank windows machine to built drod. I removed all the fumbling steps and instead incorporated them backwards as if I had always been that clever.

I guess I'll have to rewrite it sometime to read more as instructions than a diary, but for now I'd rather play with the code

(oh, yah, and since this is just a diary of what I did, I have no idea if it will work for you. none at all).



____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 05-21-2007 12:39 AM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

Excellent work! May I include your hand-rolled instructions in my next uploads of the source bundle?

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

as long as they have appropriate disclaimers like "this is a diary of what silver did to make it work, on windows XP, no guarantees, warantees, or promises of help come with", then sure


____________________________

TFMurphy
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 3118
Registered: 06-11-2007
IP: Logged

Finally decided to give this a go for myself - I like tinkering with code. silver's diary worked fine for me, though it definitely took quite a while. (But likely nowhere near as long as it took silver)

I will note one thing: Visual C++ 2005 Express is apparently one of those systems that absolutely hates non-asymmetric relations in priority queues. That's likely what Mike was driving at in a previous post now that I look, but it took me by surprise when I was testing out a few things. This meant nasty assertion errors for me whenever Slayers, Stalwarts, Halph, Guards and Brains were involved. I fixed it for myself by making the relations asymmetric, but obviously, there's no guarantee that things will still work the same with the quick fix. Fortunately, it's not likely to be an issue for actually testing code changes, especially given the release candidates are most likely being compiled under a version that does tolerate non-asymmetric relations.

Anyways, just wanted to confirm that those instructions do indeed work.

---

[Last edited by TFMurphy at 07-28-2007 03:52 AM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

Thanks, TFMurphy, for posting your experience with this. I'm glad to hear we now have a tried-and-true documented process (thanks to silver!) for getting a DROD project up and running.

Yes, that's the assertion problem we've been having. It has to do with pathmapping, as you probably noticed. The assertions only happen when building the project in Debug mode, so Release builds avoid the issue. (When debugging, I run DROD in VS6 )

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 07-28-2007 06:26 PM]

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

File: compilingDROD.txt (25.4 KB)
Downloaded 54 times.
License: Public Domain

After several hours of work, I have a new version of the compile script -- updated to DROD 3.2(.1.84) and includes some significant updates in handling of third party software because 3.2 uses some new versions of them and some urls and directories and stuff changed, and I was building libtheora a little off (including the debug ogg libs in both the debug and release versions of libtheora). Thanks to Mike for helping sort through a problem I had with compiling libtheora's new version.

also: the drod source still claims to be 3.2.0.81 even though Mike assures us it's .1.84. might want to update readme and NetInterface.cpp while including the new version of this file.

I also had an error building DRODUtil which Mike can't reproduce, but, then, he also builds his debug versions under VC6, so it's possible that it's because I'm using 7. But, as I note at the end, "I got an error compiling DRODUtil, but that's an optional, separate .exe - drod.exe was built and works."


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 09-01-2008 11:38 PM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
also: the drod source still claims to be 3.2.0.81 even though Mike assures us it's .84. might want to update readme and NetInterface.cpp while including the new version of this file.

Not sure what's going on here. The source bundle on the download page has 3.2.1.84 listed everywhere you point out.

I also had an error building DRODUtil which Mike can't reproduce, but, then, he also builds his debug versions under VC6, so it's possible that it's because I'm using 7.

If I understand correctly VS 2005 is 8.0. Hmm...I rarely make a debug build of DRODUtil. This could be the root of the problem.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

---

[Last edited by mrimer at 09-01-2008 10:13 PM]

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

mrimer wrote:

silver wrote:
also: the drod source still claims to be 3.2.0.81 even though Mike assures us it's .84. might want to update readme and NetInterface.cpp while including the new version of this file.

Not sure what's going on here. The source bundle on the download page has 3.2.1.84 listed everywhere you point out.

I cleaned out my directory and re-downloaded it twice. Really. we're talking about http://www.caravelgames.com/sourcecode.html right? I'd think I have the page cached, except that the text of the page changed to say 3.2.1.84 there (also, I need to make a minor change to compilingDROD.txt - it keeps saying 3.2.0.84 instead of 3.2.1.84) (and http://caravelgames.com/distfiles/DROD32Source.rar is the download, right?)

C:\Documents and Settings\silver Harloe\Desktop\drod>grep -ir "3\.2\.1" DROD32Source
Binary file DROD32Source/Master/Master.ncb matches

I also had an error building DRODUtil which Mike can't reproduce, but, then, he also builds his debug versions under VC6, so it's possible that it's because I'm using 7.

If I understand correctly VS 2005 is 8.0. Hmm...I rarely make a debug build of DRODUtil. This could be the root of the problem.

errr, 8, then. whichever. not VC6, anyway. I just know I had to this step:

"I right-clicked on on the "DRODUtil" project in the navigator on the left, and scrolled down to "Properties" In the resulting dialog box, in the navigator on the left, I opened up "Configuration Properties", and under that "Linker", and under that selected "Input". In the box on the right, I edited the "Additional Dependencies" and edited the part where it says "mk4vc60s_d.lib" to read "mk4vc70s_d.lib","

which impliled to me you still built DRODUtil under 6.0


____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 09-01-2008 10:21 PM]

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

...I edited step 39 to make sure -DCARAVELBUILD was removed from the release build as well. And I noted that DRODUtil built just fine under release. (I altered the attachment in the message a few back)



____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 09-01-2008 11:39 PM]

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5194
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

silver wrote:
...I edited step 39 to make sure -DCARAVELBUILD was removed from the release build as well. And I noted that DRODUtil built just fine under release. (I altered the attachment in the message a few back)

Thanks, I got the new attachment. I updated the date at the top to today's date and reuploaded the source bundle on the web site. I might have updated it improperly earlier today, so please try it out now -- it ought to have the correct version numbering in there now.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

Briareos
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3516
Registered: 08-07-2005
IP: Logged

silver wrote:

C:\Documents and Settings\silver Harloe\Desktop\drod>grep -ir "3\.2\.1" DROD32Source
Binary file DROD32Source/Master/Master.ncb matches

That's the IntelliSans database; so if the string "3.2.1" is only in there there's certainly something strange going on.

Then again there's more than one way to fry a fish, or to get the string "3.2.1" into your binary - didn't I see a definition around here today where the version string was made up of single characters, all surrounded by some macro called "We" or so?

That would throw off just about any (e)grep search string...

np: Amon Tobin - Kokubo Sosho Stealth (Chaos Theory)

____________________________
"I'm not anti-anything, I'm anti-everything, it fits better." - Sole
R.I.P. Robert Feldhoff (1962-2009)

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

Yes. It's fortunate that he alters the comment to match or my grep would not have caught that line

I still am getting the 3.2.0.81 file from http://caravelgames.com/distfiles/DROD32Source.rar ... but it turns out to be a weird caching issue in FF - when I switch to IE I get the file just fine. So sorry for the confusion :/ (and, grrr! there's no equivalent to shift-reload for downloads like there is for pages. how evil of FF)

and thanks for changing the date in the file. can't believe I forgot that

...and I double checked (steps 13 and 39, and testing the resulting drod.exe) the build for 3.2.1.84 now that I finally got it and it works fine. yay. all done futzing with the compiler today.



____________________________

---

[Last edited by silver at 09-02-2008 12:36 AM]