Rosi Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Hello community, happy new year all,I would like to contribute to 0 A.D. development but I'm working with Visual Studio 2012.The generated solution for 2010 is compatible, boost 1.44 is not because of a problem with a initializer_list include.I created a patch for msvc11, build the boost 1.44 libraries with it and made it work.Any chance of adding Visual Studio 2012 support to 0 A.D. ? I could provide the boost 1.44 libraries build with msvc11.Patch: http://pastebin.com/YZRwdbLXOther option is using newest boost version (1.52), it has msvc11 support, so no need changing source.I tested 1.52 with 0 A.D. and could provide msvc11 libs too. Edited January 1, 2013 by Rosi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historic_bruno Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 We should just upgrade the Windows boost libs, but build them with VC2008 rather than a newer edition, as that's what the autobuild utility uses and we're still officially supporting Windows 2000 and maybe pre-SP2 XP? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymond Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Windows 2000 has no official support of Microsoft. And: market share of Windows 2000 is 0.04%:http://www.netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0So why you don't drop Windows 2000 support? Edited January 1, 2013 by raymond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosi Posted January 1, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 We should just upgrade the Windows boost libs, but build them with VC2008 rather than a newer editionYou mean only build them with vc9?Thats fine for me, bulding boost isn't a problem.And about Windows 2000, I think it's safe to drop the support for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historic_bruno Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 So why you don't drop Windows 2000 support?Why? It's not taking much effort to "support" it, in fact I can't think of anything we've done recently on that front Though I did look into updating some of our bundled libs a few months ago, some of them only include VC2010 projects now, but I'm sure we could get around that with a little effort. If it makes updating the libs or maintaining the game too difficult, then I'd say dropping Win2K support is something to consider.Another factor would be our dropping the fixed renderpath which should greatly reduce the number of Win2K-compatible graphics cards that work with the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raymond Posted January 1, 2013 Report Share Posted January 1, 2013 (edited) Yes: it is to difficult to continue support for Windows 2000, just drop it. Edited January 1, 2013 by raymond Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historic_bruno Posted January 2, 2013 Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 I'm updating the bundled Boost libs to 1.51, using the binaries from BoostPro which is much more convenient than properly setting up Boost.Build myself I don't think we even use the static libs, but they are included anyway for convenience/completeness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosi Posted January 2, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 2, 2013 Thanks, I can now compile 0 A.D. without any modifications at the source, just building boost libs and putting them in the appropriate folder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosi Posted January 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2013 (edited) Just found out that msvcr90d.dll is missing in the binaries/system folder.This prevents running 0 A.D. in debug mode (if you dont copy it there yourself), other debug dll's like msvcr80d.dll or msvcr71d.dll are provided, this one is missing.I think its created by automated build but not versioned, can you add it Ben?edit: same goes for msvcp90d.dll and msvcp71d.dll, they are missing too (but I think think they are needed). Edited January 3, 2013 by Rosi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historic_bruno Posted January 3, 2013 Report Share Posted January 3, 2013 Just found out that msvcr90d.dll is missing in the binaries/system folder.This prevents running 0 A.D. in debug mode (if you dont copy it there yourself), other debug dll's like msvcr80d.dll or msvcr71d.dll are provided, this one is missing.I think its created by automated build but not versioned, can you add it Ben?edit: same goes for msvcp90d.dll and msvcp71d.dll, they are missing too (but I think think they are needed).I believe Microsoft's licensing prevents us from distributing the debug runtime libraries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosi Posted January 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted January 3, 2013 Too bad, I haven't seen a installer for the debug libraries either and they are not in "Microsoft Visual C++ 2008 SP1 Redistributable" included, only the release one afaik.I think you get them only with a fresh install of VS2008.I had to download them manually from untrustworthy source. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.