What's up with PRBoom lately?

[mewse]

I like running PRBoom on my laptop because it's a Pentium 120 running Debian, and PRBoom is one of the most faithful ports out there.

Now it appears that the Debian package is completely fucked up due to the maintainer deciding to use the GLBoom executable instead of the software executable, which arioch reported on the Debian bug tracker over a year ago, I think.

And then there's my problem with the "experimental" build they released back in September, which I posted about to the prboom-users mailing list. Proff promised it would be fixed in the next release, but that was months and months ago.

This sucks. It looks like the Debian package is now orphaned with a "outstanding" bug left unfixed, I can't get the experimental build to run on my laptop, and I really don't feel like compiling an old version of the port on my Pentium 120. I wish this would all get sorted out.

[Quasar]

Incidents of problems with prboom seem to be on a serious rise. I think the rate of development is outrunning the rate of maintenance programming, personally. If I were proff right now, I'd take some time out to fix some of the oustanding issues.

I know for a fact that prboom contains a lot of code lifted directly from SMMU v3.30, and does not contain any of the bug fixes I have written in Eternity. Some of those problems are very serious and lead to stability issues like the ones that are beginning to manifest in complaint threads on the forums.

[Graf Zahl]

Quasar said:

I know for a fact that prboom contains a lot of code lifted directly from SMMU v3.30, and does not contain any of the bug fixes I have written in Eternity.

I noticed that, too, and it certainly explains a lot of problems with the 2.3.0 release. Currently I strongly recommend to use v2.2.4. It's much more stable.

[Cyb]

but 2.3 has a console :(

[Fredrik]

but 2.3 has fancy interpolation :(

[boris]

but 2.3 has fucked up music :( ... oh wait...

[Arioch]

But 2.3 runs faster!

[Graf Zahl]

Arioch said:

But 2.3 runs faster!

Not for me...

[rpeter]

Does anybody happen to have the source code of the ancient PRBoom 2.03 beta? The official site offers only the exe. It was the last version before the merge with lxdoom and going for SDL.

[mewse]

the source code to 2.03 beta may not have ever been released. you might have to do a diff between 2.02 and the first lx/sdl merged version..

[IconOfSin]

How do you make a friendly monster ai..,,??

[Chopkinsca]

I only have used it to view demos and now when they end they have a large chance of causing the computer to restart.
fun fun fun
no big deal though, I haven't wanted to watch demos as of late anyway.

[Sephiroth]

i dont know what version i am useing. i mainly use Prboom sence it runs very well on my system, GLboom works good too.

i installed it over 6 months ago. I use it on a modified suse 8.2, ok not really even 8.2 sence i have modified the hell out of it and all

[cph]

mewse: Not sure what problem you are having, but it should be easy to compile 2.2.4 on Debian from source, as in http://prboom.sourceforge.net/linux.html#debian . I would agree with the poster who recommends 2.2.4 over 2.3.0. Yes, Debian are being dumb shipping the GL version.

rpeter: I have a copy of the prboom 2.03 source code, from around the time we merged - actually, it used to be available in CVS, and I have the CVS tarball still. I can ask proff if I can put a copy on the site, if there is demand.

Quasar`: the slow passage of time is passing much faster than the rate of development right now :-). But I am still bug-fixing for 2.2.4.

[Quasar]

Good to see you're back around, cph. I'm sure you'll get it all straightened out quickly :)

[rpeter]

Thanks Colin, I no longer need it. I was wrestling with a bug in PrBoom 2.02, I thought in 2.03 it might have been solved.
(there was no stereo sound, a flag -pan control- was missing when creating a directsound buffer.)