Hi
If anyone has thoughts on how to proceed, let me know
Rahul
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: freedoom 0.8 release? Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 00:30:30 -0700 From: Mike Swanson To: Rahul Sundaram CC: Simon Howard, RjY , catoptromancy
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I was thinking of pulling in the latest git snapshot for Fedora and built it today. I have the following wad files
/usr/share/doom/doom.wad /usr/share/doom/doom2.wad /usr/share/doom/freedm.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_levels.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_sounds.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_sprites.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_textures.wad
Currently in Fedora, we have two different packages, freedoom and freedoom-dm and I am wondering how I should proceed? What's the diff between doom.wad and doom2.wad I could have the latest freedoom obsolete freedoom-dm and move forward. Let me know what the recommended way of packaging these is.
The first three files are IWADs; files that contain the complete data for a Doom engine to run. Effectively you can ignore the freedoom*.wad files for packaging, as they all only contain patch data (PWADs).
doom.wad contains resources to support "The Ultimate Doom", the retail version of Doom 1. doom2.wad contains the resources to support Doom II and Final Doom, which the majority of PWADs (new levels, for example) require. freedm.wad is the death-match only IWAD, it contains the same resources as doom2.wad except for a different level set.
Personally I don't have a recommended way of packaging, although Debian (sorry, I'm a Debian user :P) seems to rename our doom2.wad to "freedoom.wad" (unrelated to the PWAD built from the source tree), presumably to avoid a conflict with id Software's Doom II. For compatibility purposes, our IWADs are named the same as the commercial games, but wanting both Doom and Freedoom installed system-wide would result in conflicting file names.
Hi
If anyone has thoughts on how to proceed, let me know
Rahul
If the new freedm stuff is equivalent to the old upstream for freedoom-freedm, yeah, I say Obsolete/Provide.
As for the wad filenames, I'm not sure it matters to most people as long as the .desktop file works.
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: freedoom 0.8 release? Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 00:30:30 -0700 From: Mike Swanson To: Rahul Sundaram CC: Simon Howard, RjY , catoptromancy
On Sat, Aug 20, 2011 at 2:03 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I was thinking of pulling in the latest git snapshot for Fedora and built it today. I have the following wad files
/usr/share/doom/doom.wad /usr/share/doom/doom2.wad /usr/share/doom/freedm.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_levels.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_sounds.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_sprites.wad /usr/share/doom/freedoom_textures.wad
Currently in Fedora, we have two different packages, freedoom and freedoom-dm and I am wondering how I should proceed? What's the diff between doom.wad and doom2.wad I could have the latest freedoom obsolete freedoom-dm and move forward. Let me know what the recommended way of packaging these is.
The first three files are IWADs; files that contain the complete data for a Doom engine to run. Effectively you can ignore the freedoom*.wad files for packaging, as they all only contain patch data (PWADs).
doom.wad contains resources to support "The Ultimate Doom", the retail version of Doom 1. doom2.wad contains the resources to support Doom II and Final Doom, which the majority of PWADs (new levels, for example) require. freedm.wad is the death-match only IWAD, it contains the same resources as doom2.wad except for a different level set.
Personally I don't have a recommended way of packaging, although Debian (sorry, I'm a Debian user :P) seems to rename our doom2.wad to "freedoom.wad" (unrelated to the PWAD built from the source tree), presumably to avoid a conflict with id Software's Doom II. For compatibility purposes, our IWADs are named the same as the commercial games, but wanting both Doom and Freedoom installed system-wide would result in conflicting file names.
games mailing list games@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/games
On 08/22/2011 01:59 AM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
If the new freedm stuff is equivalent to the old upstream for freedoom-freedm, yeah, I say Obsolete/Provide.
As for the wad filenames, I'm not sure it matters to most people as long as the .desktop file works.
I am ready to do this now but Wart who is the maintainer seems to have disappeared and hasn't responded to
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=730500
What's the recommend action? Should I get the packages orphaned?
Rahul
"RS" == Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com writes:
RS> What's the recommend action? Should I get the packages orphaned?
He gets busy, and you haven't really waited that long. Why not just request access if you want to work on it, or if not see if someone else in the SIG wants to do so.
- J<
"RS" == Rahul Sundaram metherid@gmail.com writes:
RS> What's the recommend action? Should I get the packages orphaned?
He gets busy, and you haven't really waited that long. Why not just request access if you want to work on it, or if not see if someone else in the SIG wants to do so.
Who's got two thumbs, is a DOOM addict, a Games SIG member, and a ProvenPackager?
<points at self with thumbs while typing awkwardly>
-J
- J<
On 08/22/2011 01:59 AM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
If the new freedm stuff is equivalent to the old upstream for freedoom-freedm, yeah, I say Obsolete/Provide.
As for the wad filenames, I'm not sure it matters to most people as long as the .desktop file works.
I just heard back from the maintainer, so I am doing the updates individually and keep the individual packages without obsoleting anything since upstream apparently plans to continue releasing separate sources for these different maps.
Rahul
-
Jason L Tibbitts III -
Jon Ciesla -
Rahul Sundaram