Does anyone here still use Doom Legacy?

[DooMAD]

Mr. Chris said:

I used to use Legacy until the main-now Newdoom site stopped being updated but havn't bothered to track their new site, so I just used a ZDoom derivative (Skulltag).

Well, technically it's their old (very old) site and that's not really being updated either. You're better off looking at the Sourceforge page or Wiki to keep an eye on any developments.

Last update to the 2.0 code was 7 weeks ago according to the repositories. Work has also recently resumed on the 1.4x branch to fix some old bugs.

[NightmareZer0]

No...and I never have

[BrokeAndDrive]

Legacy was the first non-doom95.exe source port I ever used. I loved all the extra graphics and controls, etc. but for reasons I don't recall I stopped using it (then went on a years-long Doom hiatus). When I felt like Dooming once again, I tried skulltag and it was love at first frag.

[hawkwind]

DaniJ said:

The course of development in the 1.9.x/2.0 series // internal map structure limits increased in excess of of those in any other port

Now this has piqued my interest. Please explain.

[Reisal]

DooMAD said:

Last update to the 2.0 code was 7 weeks ago according to the repositories. Work has also recently resumed on the 1.4x branch to fix some old bugs.

This makes no sense, why work on 2.0 and then jump back to the 1.4 codebase?

[Graf Zahl]

Mr. Chris said:

This makes no sense, why work on 2.0 and then jump back to the 1.4 codebase?

Apparently because they found a 1.4 fanboy who wants to work on the old code. Stranger things have happened but this really makes no sense...

[Bastet Furry]

I tried Legacy in the old days but stayed with dosdoom for a long time until discovering zDoom, then i stuck with that till now and it may seem for forever because it can do mostly everything i need.

Now if, for example, Eternity would implement a mouse driven inventory for SShock-Style RPG development i would be tempted...... *hides for Graf Zahls BFG* ;)

[fraggle]

Mr. Chris said:

This makes no sense, why work on 2.0 and then jump back to the 1.4 codebase?

Because 2.0 will never be finished?

[entryway]

fraggle said:

Because 2.0 will never be finished?

anybody doubt????

[ducon]

There is a case issue in the filenames. I can’t compile it in Linux. Is there, somewhere, a script to rename the files?

[fraggle]

rename tr/A-Z/a-z/ *

[ducon]

It won’t work.

> LANG="LC";make
make: *** No rule to make target `DJGPPDOS/i_video.c', needed by `objs/i_video.o'.  Stop.

The issue is in the Makefile too.

[Gez]

Create a small FAT partition and put the Legacy source code on it?

Heck there's probably some utility that'd allow you to create that partition in RAM. Copy, compile, copy the executable back.

[andrewj]

Pack all the code with 'zip', then unpack it (elsewhere) with 'unzip -LL' which makes all filenames and directories lowercase.

Then fix the makefile by hand.

[ducon]

The Makefile weights 50k. I won’t fix it by hand.
Pheeew, creating a loop filesystem just to compile Legacy? O_o

[Graf Zahl]

I think the writing's on the wall: The code itself is telling you in no uncertain terms what to do with it... :D

[fraggle]

ducon said:

It won’t work.

> LANG="LC";make
make: *** No rule to make target `DJGPPDOS/i_video.c', needed by `objs/i_video.o'.  Stop.

The issue is in the Makefile too.

I guess it's renamed the DJGPPDOS (correct capitalization) directory as well as all the other files; however, if it is building the DJGPP code you have bigger problems anyway.

[ducon]

Legacy was in Debian, in some old days (Potato or Woody).