End of the official Mac OS X port

[welshdragon]

Yeah, your version numbering's confusing (it doesn't match with 'trunk')

[Wintersoldier]

Sorry about that. It's due to to the fact that I compile from source downloaded from the svn repository, where I assume each version of source code is added with that number. I haven't yet figured out how to remove it.

[ChillCore]

Sorry about that. It's due to to the fact that I compile from source downloaded from the svn repository, where I assume each version of source code is added with that number. I haven't yet figured out how to remove it.

See rev.cpp.
Do have a good read before making changes ...

[Paploo]

Sorry about that. It's due to to the fact that I compile from source downloaded from the svn repository, where I assume each version of source code is added with that number. I haven't yet figured out how to remove it.

Off the top of my head, I seem to remember seeing code that, when there is a subversion tag, it uses that as the version, otherwise it uses the revision number (which goes up by one each time a dev checks in code).

What does this mean to a distribution?

If you want to compile from TRUNK, you shouldn't really use the tag numbering anyway, because it doesn't match-up to the distributions, and will cause a lot of confusion, especially if someone files a bug ticket in the tracker!

If you want to compile from a particular version release, instead of checking out trunk, checkout that tag for that version, and compile from there.

[Wintersoldier]

See rev.cpp.

Where do I find rev.cpp?

Off the top of my head, I seem to remember seeing code that, when there is a subversion tag, it uses that as the version, otherwise it uses the revision number (which goes up by one each time a dev checks in code).

What does this mean to a distribution?

If you want to compile from TRUNK, you shouldn't really use the tag numbering anyway, because it doesn't match-up to the distributions, and will cause a lot of confusion, especially if someone files a bug ticket in the tracker!

If you want to compile from a particular version release, instead of checking out trunk, checkout that tag for that version, and compile from there.

And how do I go about doing that?

Sorry if both of my questions have some sort of obvious answer, but I am still kind of new to this and want to learn as much about this as I can.

[Rubidium]

I have no idea what you think is wrong/who is doing what wrong, but editting rev.cpp to "fix" versions is not the right way. It will cause more problems than it solves, especially if it misrepresents the version in ways that cause the real devs to waste time on something that isn't there. For example claiming a bug exists in 1.0.0 when it's some 1.0.0-beta that is "marked" as 1.0.0 by "you". You would be adding nails to the coffin of the Mac OS X port if it happens.

OpenTTD's "make bundle_zip" adds a version to the bundle, please use that name.

[Wintersoldier]

I wasn't planning on editing rev.cpp, I was just interested where it was located.

[ChillCore]

Where do I find rev.cpp?

If not specified you may assume the src folder in generally if somebody points you to a file.
Otherwise someone will say for example saveload/saveload.cpp or above the src folder.

Off the top of my head, I seem to remember seeing code that, when there is a subversion tag, it uses that as the version, otherwise it uses the revision number (which goes up by one each time a dev checks in code).

What does this mean to a distribution?

If you want to compile from TRUNK, you shouldn't really use the tag numbering anyway, because it doesn't match-up to the distributions, and will cause a lot of confusion, especially if someone files a bug ticket in the tracker!

If you want to compile from a particular version release, instead of checking out trunk, checkout that tag for that version, and compile from there.

And how do I go about doing that?

Sorry if both of my questions have some sort of obvious answer, but I am still kind of new to this and want to learn as much about this as I can.

Edit:
Bad, bad sugestion removed.
Read planetmakers reply below instead.
/edit

Rubidium was faster.


Rubidium,
I have noticed some time ago that if I check out the source by zip and then compile, my build says norev. (Or something like that. It has been a while I have done that).
Would it be wrong to change rev.cpp then if I make sure that it matches the revision I have downloaded and have not modified the source?

ps: If you want me to change my post just let me know.

[planetmaker]

Sorry about that. It's due to to the fact that I compile from source downloaded from the svn repository, where I assume each version of source code is added with that number. I haven't yet figured out how to remove it.

I wasn't planning on editing rev.cpp, I was just interested where it was located.

Seems contradictory There's only very few reasons to change the displayed revisions, especially if binaries are going to be distributed. Try ./configure --help for the easiest way on changing the revision.

[Rubidium]

Would it be wrong to change rev.cpp then if I make sure that it matches the revision I have downloaded and have not modified the source?

Yes, use as planetmaker described ./configure --revision=xyz.

Do NOT change rev.cpp, especially the "modified" number because that IS needed for us to weed out bug reports that we can't solve because of a modified binary. Unless you want to make us crazy and hate you a lot. Us hating you does certainly not help your cause.

[ChillCore]

There's already enough crazy people on this globe ...
Please don't hate me, I like it here.

I did not know of the configure option. But now I do.

[xyme]

Please contiunue the OS X port, TTD is the only game I'm still playing since the time I had a 386 PC.
Also Thanks to the people putting out unsupported builds in the meantime.

[Oddysee]

A friend of mine really wants to play OpenTTD. He has a Mac and OS X 10.6.3. I know the Mac port has been discontinued but is there an unofficial build that will work for him?

[welshdragon]

A quick search (at the top of this page) should provide your answer.

[Wintersoldier]

I'm fairly sure my build would work. Just check my signature.

[Richard_S]

I don't really see the point in the argument . All we need is someone who has the mac operating system (like me) to test it, and, if I got the point correctly, we can actually program on a PC! I see no need to try all sorts of different methods to simulate the game on a different platform .

[Zuu]

Not to be unfriendly or so, but please re-read the first post in this thread where it is explained why just a tester isn't enough. By referring you to the first post hopefully there won't be yet another discussion if a mac developer really is needed or not. Rubidium did quite clearly state that in the first one or two posts.