Integrated Nightly Build

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 17 Nov 2005 17:03

Looks nice, a bit extended what you can do with simple pre-signals.

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 28 Nov 2005 21:12

Twenty-two days ago, DaleStan wrote:FoxAlpha, you need to provide, at the very least, a trivially applicable patch. Note that that is *singular*. One patch file that will make all the necessary changes to the source.
For full compliance with the GPL, you must also provide a full source archive if you provide a binary. See the "A diff is *NOT* the source" link in my siggy.

FoxAlpha.
Source.
NOW!

You've had plenty of time.

I am rather tempted to recomend that a moderator remove the binary (in this post) until such time as FoxAlpha can be bothered to provide the source, but I'm not sure that will actually have any effect.

webfreakz.nl · Post by **webfreakz.nl** » 28 Nov 2005 21:14

Do you want to compile it on Linux or what? I don't see your problem?

Prof. Frink · Post by **Prof. Frink** » 28 Nov 2005 21:38

The problem can be found Here.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 28 Nov 2005 22:32

FoxAlpha seems to be rather busy, no more builds were released...

DaleStan - just be patient, OK?

What's the matter? No good topics to reply to?

^Cartman^ · Post by **^Cartman^** » 02 Dec 2005 21:20

Have someone successfully patched the diffs from FoxAlpha's post into SVN r3090? I just get errors while patching, and it is impossible to compile.

Seems like other people have the same problems as me... and yes, I want to compile it to Linux!

FoxAlpha · Post by **FoxAlpha** » 02 Dec 2005 23:45

Hi all.

I know that i have to publish the source and i will make it next tim.

I will try to make a new release in next Week.
I have tried to make a new one, but i have found many errors and i have to fix they first. And as Sirkoz sayed i was very busy last time.

It seems that many of the patches arent comaptible since 3090. I have to find out which one i have to leave.

Fox

nicfer · Post by **nicfer** » 03 Dec 2005 00:05

FoxAlpha wrote:I have to find out which one i have to leave.

...and what new will join. Here are someones:

Yellow signal state
Disable "Repay loan" button if funds are insufficient
Statix Tools
Toolbar Overlap Fix
Oil industries placed anywhere on map
Copy orders from vehicle windows
Town growth patch
Tiles quantity Calculator

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 03 Dec 2005 00:15

Those patches are quite nice, especially/most needed, the Town Growth patch - very nice - no more excessive roads from towns.

BTW - Fox - I'll update and maybe add some control sliders to my patches.

FoxAlpha · Post by **FoxAlpha** » 03 Dec 2005 02:03

Thanks Slayer for your Suggestions.
I will look at each patch, there are very interesting.

Please inform me if you have finished your update, sirkoz.

Fox

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 03 Dec 2005 04:12

FoxAlpha wrote:Hi all.

I know that i have to publish the source and i will make it next tim.

I will try to make a new release in next Week.
I have tried to make a new one, but i have found many errors and i have to fix they first. And as Sirkoz sayed i was very busy last time.

It seems that many of the patches arent comaptible since 3090. I have to find out which one i have to leave.

Fox

Definitely a problem in Municipal Airports with your r3090I4.5 - with MA, it broke depots & autorenew bigtime; was renewing a vehicle every visit to a depot whether autorenew was on or off!! When I compiled with all but MA, depots worked fine, autorenew responded properly to its configure patches switch.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 03 Dec 2005 08:11

richk67 - looks like the MA patch has yet some problems, that may have been tied with some bugs in nightly r3090 alone - please test the patch with the latest source and report in its topic under OTTD_Development/MA_patch.

FoxAlpha · Post by **FoxAlpha** » 14 Dec 2005 20:47

Hi all,
i'am sorry about i have sayd that i finish a new realease about two weeks ago.

But i have a new job and my work time are very bad. I am arriving at home at 20:30 and then i have no really motivation to work at the I4.

I can't say when i wil have enought time and motivation to finish it. But i hope it will be this month.

But it is open source and everyone who have a working compiler and a littlebit knowledge about c/c++ can compile a new version. Patches are enouth available.

Fox

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 14 Dec 2005 21:05

FoxAlpha wrote:But it is open source and everyone who have a working compiler and a littlebit knowledge about c/c++ can compile a new version.

Not if you don't give us the source, we can't.

FoxAlpha wrote:Patches are enouth

For the umpteenth time: No they are *NOT*.
How are we supposed to know which way you chose to rectify the conflicts? Read your mind?

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 14 Dec 2005 21:09

Fox, please post your last integrated source (r3090) if you can and yes, as DaleStan said, it would be really good to know how the quite numerous conflicts were resolved.

Thank you.

FoxAlpha · Post by **FoxAlpha** » 14 Dec 2005 21:16

The source is available from the Subversion Server or by download the latest nightly sorce. Where everyone have access. The source and the used patches from the I4 r3090 are very outdated.

I choose the patches which i will include by the way that i read the Threads of the most popular patches. And then i try to compile the latest Source against this patches. When they work they will be included.

This way can everybody reproduce with a working compiling envirement.
And noone will need my source.

If someone are intrested and will the source, pm me with a mail adress and i will send it. Momentary i have no acces to a webspace with enought space/traffic to populate this for all, sorry.

fox

EDIT:
If i find a conflict i try to solve this with my own knowledge of programming and then Try and error.

DaleStan · Post by **DaleStan** » 14 Dec 2005 22:03

FoxAlpha wrote:The source is available from the Subversion Server or by download the latest nightly sorce. Where everyone have access. The source and the used patches from the I4 r3090 are very outdated.

NO! NO! NO! That is not the source! The source is whatever is necessary to build the binary with nothing more complicated than opening a file and clicking Compile, or typing "./configure && make".

In this case, that's an archive containing all the files you get from an clean SVN checkout, except those in the .svn folders, >>>AS CHANGED BY THE DIFF FILES<<<.
That bears repeating, because you obviously don't get it: The source is what you have *AFTER* you apply the patches, not before.
I'll try one more way too: The patches, although possibly useful, are *NOT* part of the source.

FoxAlpha wrote:Momentary i have no acces to a webspace with enought space/traffic to populate this for all, sorry.

That's your problem. You are responsible for fixing it, or refraining from posting binaries.
FYI, the forums accept files up to 2 MB, and both Win-RAR and 7-Zip can pack the source down to about 1.9MB.

If you can't acquire either of those programs, or you can't make them behave, or are otherwise incapable of posting the full source, you may not post a binary. You're always welcome to post a single monolithic diff, of course, but binaries require source, not just a diff.

FoxAlpha wrote:If i find a conflict i try to solve this with my own knowledge of programming and then Try and error.

You still have to tell us what you did to resolve the conficts. And "I tried things until it worked" is how you did it, not what you did. What you did is "At lines $FOO-$BAR of $FILE, I used @LINES, instead of @CONFLICTED_LINES."

richk67 · Post by **richk67** » 14 Dec 2005 23:35

Dalestan - you may be technically correct, but the only result of your insistence on this is that the rest of us DO NOT get an integrated nightly.

Either a) lay off the guy - he is being helpful to the community, or,
b) do the integration to your standards, and post your precious SOURCE and the EXE in this thread.

OK? Please!

On what defines a source... http://www.google.co.uk/search?hs=63z&h ... arch&meta=

To me a source is any set of language instructions in a human-readable format. It does NOT need to even compile (heck, some of my university projects didnt compile, but still had over 10,000 lines of source code.) (Before I debugged them that is...)

I dont see your definition there!

If you have a patch that correctly patches against a particular specified version of the code (held elsewhere), then to all but the petty, that IS a source. It WILL compile when correctly downloaded and patched.

You have a source when you download from the SVN; you have another when you apply each patch. As long as the DIFF is between the final working integrated nightly source, and a specified nightly release (the original SVN download), then that is a source even you could use.
[/url]

Sacro · Post by **Sacro** » 15 Dec 2005 00:07

3rd one down - "The form in which a computer program is written by the programmer. Source code is written in a formal programming language that can be compiled automatically into object code or machine code or executed by an interpreter. (Ref: foldoc)"

All a diff is is a comparison to an already existing file.

The main problem I see, is that FoxAlpha has not only patched the SVN version, but he has had to alter code to resolve conflicts. What he now has to do, is show what he did to resolve the conflicts, this is not doable automatically by a compiler, and thus cannot be classed as valid source code, therefore he cannot publicly or privatly release a compiled binary, without also either sending, or providing information on how to get the source code (not a diff).

The main reason for the full source, is that the SVN server might for some unforseen reason, not be usable, and the source no longer be available. Its not up to the OpenTTD developers to hold the source for 3rd party versions.

SirkoZ · Post by **SirkoZ** » 15 Dec 2005 00:20

DaleStan - one question - will you continue with the integrated_nightly when FoxAlpha sends/makes the source available?

Transport Tycoon Forums

Integrated Nightly Build

Who is online