now that MQ is source only, how long before...

zedisdeadbaby · Post by **zedisdeadbaby** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 11:37 am

now that MQ is source code only, how long before we see auctions on playerauctions for installation packages of compiled version of MQ.

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:06 pm

If we start seeing that we just take the source underground as well.

I've already compiled a binary only distribution, just won't release it without the general consensus of the "developers". Not because I'm worried about a nerf, that's going to happen again anyway, but out of respect for the folks who have done so much to forge a working version.

In addition I'm working on a port over to a publicly available compiler, to remove dependency on Visual C++. Actually got it down from over 200 errors to just one today....

The fact is that source only just means folks have to figure out how to plug the code into their compilers and give the build command, which if you think about it isn't really much of a problem. If they can learn to write macros they can figure that one out.

AlphaBeta · Post by **AlphaBeta** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 12:25 pm

Where can we get a compiler from?

Mckorr · Post by **Mckorr** » Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:09 pm

If I get it ported over away from Microsoft Visual C++ I'll post complete instructions and links. If you want to try to port it yourself, or help me figure it out, go to http://www.bloodshed.net and download a copy of Dev-C++. I'm using the latest one (Dev-C++ 5 beta 7), based on GCC 3.2. Make sure to download and install all the updates.

icon · Post by **icon** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 7:01 pm

I'd have to agree with McCorr, Dev-C++ has been my favorite compiler for like 5 years, and I think it's just great.

Revenge · Post by **Revenge** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 7:19 pm

Would you post a copy of the error, perhaps we can figure it out with collective XP on the matter.

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 8:27 pm

Will we still be able to develop the project with VS.NET? I want to help with dev, but it's not worth dealing with a third GUI (Borland Builder is in some ways better than VS.net...but, I can deal with VS.net).

My opinion is that we stick with VS.net. Those that don't have it can save their money and buy it or else beg someone with it to compile it for them. Those that are developing can use donations to the project to buy it (if they're approved by MQ admins), or else if no money is available, we can ALL suffer.

Visual Studio is designed by those that designed the operating system on which MQ runs. It makes sense that this compiler/GUI/IDE would be the best choice.

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Thu Mar 13, 2003 8:29 pm

now that MQ is source code only, how long before we see auctions on playerauctions for installation packages of compiled version of MQ.

By the way, this is plain silly. If they wanted to auction something, they'd auction an installshield executable so you can install it on your computer without any effort. Why make people compile it?

There is a reason that people compile things on linux/unix instead of releasing binaries. Think about it carefully and it will come to you.

zedisdeadbaby · Post by **zedisdeadbaby** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 10:22 am

That's what I meant. An install that installed an already compiled version.

Anyway any auction with the binary would also have to include the source code too since it is gnu licenced.

Amadeus wrote:
By the way, this is plain silly. If they wanted to auction something, they'd auction an installshield executable so you can install it on your computer without any effort. Why make people compile it?

There is a reason that people compile things on linux/unix instead of releasing binaries. Think about it carefully and it will come to you.

Amadeus · Post by **Amadeus** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 1:10 pm

Anyway any auction with the binary would also have to include the source code too since it is gnu licenced.

Very little being auctioned on playerauctions.com is legal. Very little to do with MacroQuest is legal. Why would anyone care about the GNU licence when the application itself is breaking the law? ..hehehe

L124RD · Post by **L124RD** » Fri Mar 14, 2003 10:59 pm

Salutations,

Amadeus wrote:Why would anyone care about the GNU licence when the application itself is breaking the law? ..hehehe

It breaks the EULA, not the law.

now that MQ is source only, how long before...

now that MQ is source only, how long before...

Error