Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 44

Thread: Backward compatibility hell

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whizse View Post
    just create a symlink to the system libsdl.

    True

    ....

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    372

    Default

    I think that we, non M$ based users, are quite doomed with games or softwares in general. I mean that if a game was compiled for an old ecosystem we won't be able to reproduce this ecosystem as we evolve it. The best way would be to build/package the game/software and release it with the needed libs, so it will act as a stand alone program.

    Maybe the current closed source game makers would be kind enough to recompile the game with the new libs. But i don't really think that they would.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by poofyyoda View Post
    So how can we expect game developers to bother about linux then when the ecosystem is so screwed?
    this is serious BS.
    when vista came out nothing worked on it, after so long many things still dont(even after all the vendors patched their older stuff -some did).

    now, the OSS world is constantly evolving, so basically you're getting a new OS every 6 months or year(for many cases), unless you use the 'stable/lts' or whatnot version of things... which may be more advisable to general whiners out there.
    STILL, that doesnt keep you from simply copying the libraries/files over and play JUST FINE. its not like in win where if there is no forward OR backwards compat... you ARE screwed.

    So all of this is very hilarious. Plus, to be honest, UBUNTU is a distro that aims to be bleeding edge, and more or less ONLY that.
    its not like in debian or many other distros where you find a load of versions of the same libs.

    for instance i played with emulators a lot once, and they required lots of old versions of many things... solution? simply go to your friendly package manager and install an older version of the lib.
    OR if its so prehistoric and uncommon(why oh why?) that your "repo" doesnt have it... compile it from source.


    the bottom line is THERE IS ALWAYS A WAY in OSS, or linux mainly.

    NOT the case under windows...

    so you guys really need to re-evaluate this posture, and that 'windows' mindset.

    cheers

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    317

    Default

    so? just get a copy of those libs, it aint that hard

    look at it from the windows P.O.V. your fucked if it doesn't work because of a core change to the OS (and that can happen every 3years ... happened 2k -> XP, XP->vista [ok 5for that one] and even vista->win7)

    Windows dll model has no concept of versioned libs side by side (they have a fugly SxS virtual db todo it now but it is... FUGLY

    linux/*NIX has been able todo versioned shared libs since the year... dot.
    Now if a major change happened to the kernel (warranting a 2.8.x) or to Glibc then panic BUT even still those two have been stable for what? years

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    331

    Default

    UT2004 breaks without directFB libraries?

    Sounds more like Ubuntu is screwed up to me, Gentoo's UT2004 has no such dependency (and it even got an official update last week!)

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    68

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ant P. View Post
    UT2004 breaks without directFB libraries?

    Sounds more like Ubuntu is screwed up to me, Gentoo's UT2004 has no such dependency (and it even got an official update last week!)


    nah, it was just me being stupid, and had an old libSDL in my folder which expected older directfb etc.. libraries.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    372

    Default

    hmmm, Ubuntu you say. TBH i really displeased by Ubuntu's way of doing things... It's true that Ubuntu is really popular but it's somehow becoming a "windows like" OS based on linux. Please forgive me but it's how i see Ubuntu. Many softwares has been reported broken or buggy. I've installed many closed source games on my linux distro (mandriva in fact) and almost never had issues like non functional libs.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    g2 remember that if (and im just throwing this out der) 90% of linux users use ubuntu, your gunna get 90% of linux problems related to ubuntu.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Well most of those installers could use some tlc, if even they just got rid of the static libs.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,587

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L33F3R View Post
    g2 remember that if (and im just throwing this out der) 90% of linux users use ubuntu, your gunna get 90% of linux problems related to ubuntu.
    90%..... I don't think so.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •