Linux version ... :D

coolsi · Postby **coolsi** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:04 am

Montyphy wrote:I doubt the Dev CD is going to be of any use to you unless you plan to spend ages porting the code to Linux

Er...what? Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

Montyphy · Postby **Montyphy** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:13 am

coolsi wrote:
Montyphy wrote:I doubt the Dev CD is going to be of any use to you unless you plan to spend ages porting the code to Linux

Er...what? Do you have any idea what you're talking about?

In regards to what? Porting code to work on different platforms? What files are present on the Dev CD?

coolsi · Postby **coolsi** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:29 am

There's no need to port the code. There's nothing Windows-specific.

Montyphy · Postby **Montyphy** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:31 am

coolsi wrote:There's no need to port the code. There's nothing Windows-specific.

Yet you stated it needs a patch to compile on Linux

coolsi · Postby **coolsi** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:35 am

...which is on the DevCD. There's no porting needed at all...

Montyphy · Postby **Montyphy** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:40 am

Then I was obviously wrong. Hmm.. I swear the conversation happened the other way round.

coolsi · Postby **coolsi** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:41 am

Yes. So in the future don't go lecturing people on how you will 'prove them wrong' before you know what you're actually talking about.

Montyphy · Postby **Montyphy** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 1:43 am

I wasn't trying to prove him wrong, only give a fair warning. Albeit I was wrong.

idle · Postby **idle** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 9:32 am

have any one tried a compilation with gcc 4.1...?

snoogie · Postby **snoogie** » Sun Sep 24, 2006 11:34 am

4.0.3 for me

Linux version ... :D

Who is online