Alternative OS support priority

rememberthe8bit · Post by **rememberthe8bit** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:29 pm

I am a Mac OSX user, and I was wondering how high of a priority it is to get this emulator compiled for all different platforms at once, so that we can have simultaneous updates.

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:33 pm

Well, it should compile under MacOSX fine.

Â

At least with the current makefile. I know other folks got the SDL version running great in the Mac OS.

Â

The main intent with the Qt GUI system, is that it allows for all platforms to share the same GUI code, so also, it shares the core code too. Which means one core update for one OS, effects the rest.

rememberthe8bit · Post by **rememberthe8bit** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:40 pm

Well, it should compile under MacOSX fine.

Â

At least with the current makefile. I know other folks got the SDL version running great in the Mac OS.

Â

The main intent with the Qt GUI system, is that it allows for all platforms to share the same GUI code, so also, it shares the core code too. Which means one core update for one OS, effects the rest.

Â

I've only been able to get a C development environment up twice. (Devkitpro and GP2X Bloodshed, dead easy to install.) And I was wondering what you would recommend for making a Mac OS build. (GCC maybe?)

Â

EDIT: If people are making builds easily, then why do I never see them? Anyway, I see that Spacey made a build with Visual Studio...

Â

EDIT #2: By the way, thanks for doing all this work, I really appreciate it, even if I have to run the builds under VMWare! [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/smile.png[/img]/emoticons/smile@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20" />

mudlord · Post by **mudlord** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 8:45 pm

And I was wondering what you would recommend for making a Mac OS build.

Â

Yep, use GCC

Â

If people are making builds easily, then why do I never see them?

Â

Mainly because they do builds for themselves [img]<fileStore.core_Emoticons>/emoticons/tongue.png[/img]/emoticons/tongue@2x.png 2x" width="20" height="20" />

spacy51 · Post by **spacy51** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:21 pm

If people are making builds easily, then why do I never see them? Anyway, I see that Spacy made a build with Visual Studio...

Â

I do not offer Mac or Linux builds because my machine does not run Mac or Linux. I would not be able to test the build I am going to release and that would give me a bad feeling in my stomach.

Â

If development has gone further, I am sure we will publish a how-to to build VBA-M yourself for every platform.

rememberthe8bit · Post by **rememberthe8bit** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 9:33 pm

<blockquote data-ipsquote="" class="ipsQuote" data-ipsquote-contentapp="forums" data-ipsquote-contenttype="forums" data-ipsquote-contentid="11" data-ipsquote-contentclass="forums_Topic"><div>

If development has gone further, I am sure we will publish a how-to to build VBA-M yourself for every platform.

Â

OK, thank you both.

</div></blockquote>

Nach · Post by **Nach** » Tue Mar 18, 2008 11:36 pm

We'll definitely be putting out Windows binaries with each release. Putting out Linux binaries would be possible, but most will probably prefer compiling it themselves, or allow their distro to handle it. I'll only make Linux binaries if people really want them. I don't think anyone here is running Mac OS X or BSD, so those users will have to compile themselves from source like Linux users. However, we'll probably be able to get a Mac OS X person on the team, at least for the sole purpose of making releases by the time we get around to our first release.