|
This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. |
1
2
|
Allegro 4.4.2 released |
Michał Cichoń
Member #11,736
March 2010
|
OK. Complete Allegro 4.4 build. You will find links at the end of this post. They are very same like in the post above, archive files were updated. What changed: allegro-4.4.2-mingw-3.4.5.7z "God starts from scratch too" |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Edgar Reynaldo said: Should the output from cmake be adjusted to match your naming convention? The other way around, I would say... |
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
That would be fine too. The output from cmake is a little inconsistent currently though, as the release static version is named liballeg.a but the debug and profile static versions both have a -static suffix. @Michal Something odd - liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a is 1160KB and is smaller than liballegro-4.4.2-mt.a, which is 1334KB. That doesn't seem right? Is the liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a library a static library? My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
Evert said: The other way around, I would say... Allegro's naming convention is not verbose enough for distributing multiple binary versions (different Allegro versions, different compilers, monolithic builds, etc) of the libraries. I don't see any problem with the two not being the same. If a person is unable to follow a tutorial because the file names aren't exactly the same, then he just needs to get a bit smarter. |
Evert
Member #794
November 2000
|
Matthew Leverton said: I don't see any problem with the two not being the same. If a person is unable to follow a tutorial because the file names aren't exactly the same, then he just needs to get a bit smarter.
True. |
Arthur Kalliokoski
Second in Command
February 2005
|
Evert said: it was still common practice to keep all DLLs in one place. I think that's changed now, and you're supposed to keep them with the executable? I think it was to prevent crackers from installing their DLL's into system folders, so you need to keep your DLL in your own directory where you have write access. Of course crackers can still do that too... They all watch too much MSNBC... they get ideas. |
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
Don't you guys think it is a little unconventional to have cmake produce libraries named differently than the pre built binaries? Otherwise in the docs and tutorials you have to have two different sections to cover linking both ways. No reason to add more confusion to the mix. My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Michał Cichoń
Member #11,736
March 2010
|
Edgar Reynaldo said: I can't seem to get a test program to build when linking to the liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a library. It keeps giving me undefined references to allegro functions. It works fine when I use liballegro-4.4.2-mt.a though. Something odd - liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a is 1160KB and is smaller than liballegro-4.4.2-mt.a, which is 1334KB. That doesn't seem right? Is the liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a library a static library? You're correct, monolith builds does not have symbols properly exported. I will look at the issue. Sorry, that is entirely my fault. "God starts from scratch too" |
Peter Wang
Member #23
April 2000
|
I'm not so much worried about tutorials as breaking makefiles.
|
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
@Michal My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Michał Cichoń
Member #11,736
March 2010
|
I'm not using CMake. I have a script which generate Code::Blocks projects. That's where my binaries comes from. "God starts from scratch too" |
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
Okay then, that's fine. Well, I guess we can make tutorials that cover linking to the binaries produced by Cmake as well as the binaries produced by your projects. Any chance of making a static monolith library for Allegro 4.4? That would be really nice. My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Michał Cichoń
Member #11,736
March 2010
|
Yes, there will be static monolith library of A4.4. Right now I'm fighting with GCC 3.4.5 misfeature. When I solve that, I will produce new packages. "God starts from scratch too" |
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
Sounds good. Thanks for working on this. My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Andrei Ellman
Member #3,434
April 2003
|
Personally, I'll be using Allegro 4.x for a while. This is because the project I'm working on relies a lot on paletted modes and MIDI which are not supported by A5, so I'm glad 4.x is still being maintained. But I will of course consider 5.x for future projects. Last I heard, 4.4.x does not work on DOS but 4.2.x does. IIRC this involved an issue with draw_sprite_ex() which could not be resolved using just C code alone, and none of the devs were willing to delve into the world of machine-code haxx0ring. Back in 1997 when I was working on AllegroPak, I hacked my own machine-code versions of the various sprite-drawing functions (so I could add Z-buffering functionality), so I have some experience with the DOS machine-code. But alas, it's unlikely I'll have any time in the near future to look into this. Also, I seem to remember that someone was having an issue getting LOGG to work with DOS, but I recently managed to compile and run the LOGG test-programs in DOS so I couldn't find any issues with LOGG on DOS. Were there any other issues with DOS support on 4.4.x? AE. PS. Does anyone think we should rename the Allegro 4.x branch to "Allegro Classic"? -- |
Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
|
Andrei Ellman said: Does anyone think we should rename the Allegro 4.x branch to "Allegro Classic"? Only if we name series 5 "Allegro Pro." |
Thomas Fjellstrom
Member #476
June 2000
|
Andrei Ellman said: Last I heard, 4.4.x does not work on DOS but 4.2.x does. IIRC this involved an issue with draw_sprite_ex() which could not be resolved using just C code alone, and none of the devs were willing to delve into the world of machine-code haxx0ring. I think the issue is that no-one wants to touch the old crusty ASM anymore. And the DOS port is filled with it. Even its own calling convention. -- |
Michał Cichoń
Member #11,736
March 2010
|
Edgar, try it now. This build should work. Again, archives were replaced with new ones. This time symbols were exported with explicitly generated definition file. So all should be there. allegro-4.4.2-mingw-3.4.5.7z "God starts from scratch too" |
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
Linking a simple test program with liballegro-4.4.2-monolith-mt.a works correctly now. I'll see about testing some more tomorrow. Thanks Michal! My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Larkin
Member #11,125
July 2009
|
Appreciate your efforts to improve allegro4. I will use it for a while with my old projects.
|
Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
|
Hey Mr. Leverton, do you think the binaries are ready to be put up on the files page? My Website! | EAGLE GUI Library Demos | My Deviant Art Gallery | Spiraloid Preview | A4 FontMaker | Skyline! (Missile Defense) Eagle and Allegro 5 binaries | Older Allegro 4 and 5 binaries | Allegro 5 compile guide |
Larkin
Member #11,125
July 2009
|
Quote: Eliminated the need for old DirectX headers for the Windows port How was this achieved ? No more need to deploy dx70_min.zip ?
|
|
1
2
|