Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Moderator: Forum Moderators
Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Hello,
For why we have only windows package of wesnoth 1.0.3, and no source code ?
https://sourceforge.net/projects/wesnot ... oth-1.0.3/
For why we have only windows package of wesnoth 1.0.3, and no source code ?
https://sourceforge.net/projects/wesnot ... oth-1.0.3/
« Hacker vaillant, rien d’impossible ! »
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5592
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Given that's now 16 years ago, I doubt anyone remembers the answer to that. The full history with tags is available via the public git repo however.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
There isn't actually a tag for version 1.0.3, though.Pentarctagon wrote: ↑October 29th, 2022, 2:44 pm Given that's now 16 years ago, I doubt anyone remembers the answer to that. The full history with tags is available via the public git repo however.
There was a mailing list thread in June 2006 about the Wesnoth 1.0.3 release. It's kind of hard to follow, but it appears that this is what happened:
- Some people wanted version 1.0.3 to be released
- The development team was busy working on version 1.1 (soon to be version 1.2) and didn't want to make another 1.0.x release
- Someone else ended up making the release who wasn't usually involved in making releases (this probably explains why they forgot to do some things like update the version number, create a tag, provide downloads other than the Windows package, etc.)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Thank you for all your answers.
I'm recompiling old versions of the game and I came across this weirdness, without being able to understand it.
By the way, while compiling version 1.2.8, I came across a bug without the compiler or the internet offering me a solution. Not knowing anything about C++, I ask you:
The configure file ran without any problem, and make shows me this error (drowned in mountains of various warnings).
g++ is already the newest version (4:10.2.1-1)
cmake is already the newest version (3.18.4-2+rpt1+rpi1+deb11u1).
I'm recompiling old versions of the game and I came across this weirdness, without being able to understand it.
By the way, while compiling version 1.2.8, I came across a bug without the compiler or the internet offering me a solution. Not knowing anything about C++, I ask you:
Spoiler:
g++ is already the newest version (4:10.2.1-1)
cmake is already the newest version (3.18.4-2+rpt1+rpi1+deb11u1).
« Hacker vaillant, rien d’impossible ! »
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
I'm guessing that's probably due to the default C++ standard having changed between when 1.2.8 was released and now; try compiling with whatever version of g++ would have been the current version at the timealberic89 wrote: ↑October 30th, 2022, 8:16 am Thank you for all your answers.
I'm recompiling old versions of the game and I came across this weirdness, without being able to understand it.
By the way, while compiling version 1.2.8, I came across a bug without the compiler or the internet offering me a solution. Not knowing anything about C++, I ask you:The configure file ran without any problem, and make shows me this error (drowned in mountains of various warnings).Spoiler:
g++ is already the newest version (4:10.2.1-1)
cmake is already the newest version (3.18.4-2+rpt1+rpi1+deb11u1).
Wesnoth-related GitHub repos:
General mods collection, SotBEEE, AToTBWaTD, The Earth's Gut, A Little Adventure, FtF
Social media: Mastodon: @egallager@treehouse.systems, Steam: egallager
General mods collection, SotBEEE, AToTBWaTD, The Earth's Gut, A Little Adventure, FtF
Social media: Mastodon: @egallager@treehouse.systems, Steam: egallager
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Tanks you egallager
I have downloaded the 4.2.2 version of gcc, and I try to compile soon.
I have downloaded the 4.2.2 version of gcc, and I try to compile soon.
« Hacker vaillant, rien d’impossible ! »
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
If you're compiling old versions, it's usually better to use the latest commit on a branch rather than a tagged version (e.g., use branch
1.2
rather than tag 1.2.8
). Branches occasionally get bug fixes after the final release was made (sometimes these are things like fixes for modern compilers).However, that doesn't actually help with the
1.2
branch (and the 1.4
branch) - they have this compilation issue with modern GCC. I used this patch to get it to compile:EDIT: there is a better patch here, I recommend using that one instead.
Last edited by gnombat on November 2nd, 2022, 12:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5592
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Would you be able to submit that as a PR on github?
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
It may not be a good idea, it was kind of a quick hack (just moving things from the .hpp file to the .cpp file until it compiles ). I'm not 100% sure it won't cause issues (in particular it is likely to be slower than the original). It would be interesting to see if anyone has a cleaner fix for that.Pentarctagon wrote: ↑October 30th, 2022, 3:11 pm Would you be able to submit that as a PR on github?
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5592
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Well, mainly I'm just thinking it's unlikely there will be any other fix that someone comes up with. Plus given the much more limited hardware that version had to work on, any performance slowdown from this is unlikely to matter.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
But since we are using much more powerful hardware than in the past, the slowdown should be largely compensated, right?
« Hacker vaillant, rien d’impossible ! »
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5592
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
Right. Even if this somehow reduced the game's performance by half (highly unlikely), improvements in hardware performance over the last 10+ years would still more than compensate for it.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
It will probably work fine on modern hardware. But there's another possible use case: some users might want to run Wesnoth on an older machine, and they know the machine can't handle Wesnoth 1.16 (or any recent version of Wesnoth), so they might try compiling an old version like 1.2 or 1.4. They probably wouldn't want this patch.
- Pentarctagon
- Project Manager
- Posts: 5592
- Joined: March 22nd, 2009, 10:50 pm
- Location: Earth (occasionally)
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
As long as the commit message is clear about what its purpose is, I'd say that should be fine. Anyone building on vintage hardware can either revert the commit or build from the latest tag for that branch.
99 little bugs in the code, 99 little bugs
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
take one down, patch it around
-2,147,483,648 little bugs in the code
Re: Wesnoth 1.0.3 ?
I posted a request for help on a French forum (https://linuxfr.org/forums/programmatio ... nt-1905384), and here is the beginning of the proposed solution:
One last quick question. I didn't find any instructions to compile from the gitub repository other than with cmake, which is only usable from 1.6.
I tried these commands found on the internet :
and then the standard installation that gets stuck at sudo make install with the error :
You can see the complete installation at https://asciinema.org/a/533725.
I will test the solution, and if not try the gnombat patch.for the first erroryou remove the "const" on the left (the first word of the line) which is useless.Code: Select all
const type get_type() const { return val_.type_; };
for the second one, you add aat the top of the unit_map.hpp file, at the end of the other "#include"Code: Select all
#include <utility>
One last quick question. I didn't find any instructions to compile from the gitub repository other than with cmake, which is only usable from 1.6.
I tried these commands found on the internet :
Code: Select all
autoheader && aclocal && libtoolize --ltdl --copy --force && automake --add-missing --copy && autoconf
Spoiler:
« Hacker vaillant, rien d’impossible ! »