Jump to content

Building a 64-bit pyrogenesis (and deps) for Windows


Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

@asterix

I'm fond of both patches, the valgrind one I used prior to it being committed. The pkg-config one was useless for this task. Beside using cmake in the meantime, there is the issue of the pkg-config premake module needing halve a dozen patches to support cross compiling and being made compatible with pkgconf (an alternate implementation) in combination with a cross root and finally compiling for windows using pkg-config isn't foreseen by the external library search logic either. Further the current premake setup feeds flags to the resource compiler which it doesn't understand and so further adjustments would need to be made.

What I did since last update:

  • cherry picked patch for mingw runtime 9.0.0 to support gcc 11 (openal build)
  • switched to gcc 11.2
  • updated binutils to 2.37
  • boost updated to 1.77
  • curl updated to 7.79

 

After talking with @Stan` I also looked into clang status, cross compiling to windows still can't be considered mature. There is initial pdb support in llvm which probably is desirable and I guess gcc will never have. There is also a very immature resource compiler which would be needed as well. So in a year or two clang is probably a good alternative.

He also told me that antivirus doesn't like 0ad and if built with mingw even less, I thought about it and think the injection of startup code into crt before standard program entry might be a possible reason for this. To be honest this is a first seeing this trick. Might giving changing the startup procedure a try.

I already started feeding changes back to 0ad, but with @wraitii having barely any time for 0ad currently this might be a lengthy process. So don't expect it being available for general consumption anytime soon.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hyperion said:

He also told me that antivirus doesn't like 0ad and if built with mingw even less, I thought about it and think the injection of startup code into crt before standard program entry might be a possible reason for this. To be honest this is a first seeing this trick. Might giving changing the startup procedure a try.

I already started feeding changes back to 0ad, but with @wraitii having barely any time for 0ad currently this might be a lengthy process. So don't expect it being available for general consumption anytime soon.

Hit me up if you need anything. Maybe @vladislavbelov could review your patches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm currently ahead of trunk by roughly 70 patches. 40-50 are mostly trivial to review and reject/apply, who does it isn't relevant for me. As there is no patch series support in phab this won't be particularly fast anyway. Also I'm not in a hurry either.

There are also upstreams to wait for to some degree, so it taking time isn't necessarily bad as long as there is some progress.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Stan` said:

Btw I'm a bit worried about the lack of response on the compressonator library. It was the same with NVTT in the past.

Might be a lengthy vacation, will ping at some point, so even if not fixed anytime soon we can at least know what would need to be done on our side if we choose compressonator.

 

59 minutes ago, Stan` said:

I'm currently considering extracting nvtt bits and ditching the rest of the lib.

This doesn't sound like much of an improvement. Fixing it to fetch a tarball and apply patches as is done for spidermonkey might be desirable but low priority as long as getting away from it is seriously considered. Moving tinygettext and properly build as external dep with option as system dep sounds like time better invested.

If there are other alternatives to nvtt I don't mind looking into them either, but to be clear, I'm still under the impression compressionator to be a good choice for 0ad. Clean api, quality kernels and a whole slew of extras for artists is probably hard to get elsewhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can the CI handle it? Do I have to rebase any patch onto master first? Does the committer have to rebase them again when committing? Do I have to manually list any dependencies? What happens if there are changes to master, do I have to rebase them and manually extract and update them again?

Well, of course emulating series support is possible to some degree but that doesn't mean it's helpful. If it were arcanist wouldn't be eager to squash commits and 0ad devs wouldn't add semi random changes to existing patches just because the file was already touched or similar. If series support were a first class citizen of the workflow probably 90% of the commits would be split. For example the valgrind patch you mentioned has an "and" in the subject line, acknowledging that it's at least two logical changes squashed. Then look at the corresponding differential in phab and you will notice it could have become a couple more "and" as well.

Phab is great for multiple people collaborating on a single change but for a simple reject/accept review it's barely adequate/ the overhead unreasonable. In my perception feeding them one by one or in small batches (they are mostly logically independent) isn't fast but causes the least work for me and reviewers alike over all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/09/2021 at 10:33 PM, hyperion said:

Can the CI handle it?

Not yet. See: https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4085 (Of course point is moot if we move away from Phab, but one fire at a time)

On 25/09/2021 at 10:33 PM, hyperion said:

Do I have to rebase any patch onto master first

Well it's better if you do, but if nobody touched the files you changed you should be fine.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Stan` said:

Well it's better if you do, but if nobody touched the files you changed you should be fine.

Well, some of my own patches already conflict / require rebase if order changes. Basically I have to split the mingw branch into up to 70 branches if I go along with this. :)

The patch I submitted in the meantime already needs rebasing, should I do it and retrigger CI and hope it gets committed before needing another rebase or leave it be for instance? Also having dozens of open differentials doesn't sound that enticing either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, hyperion said:

The patch I submitted in the meantime already needs rebasing, should I do it and retrigger CI and hope it gets committed before needing another rebase or leave it be for instance? Also having dozens of open differentials doesn't sound that enticing either.

Vlad told me he'd do the rebase. I haven't asked since.

Well yeah it sucks, but unless I can review those patches I'm not sure I can do much. Now technically if they are atomic it should be pretty obvious if they are correct.

The utf16 one is slightly out of my reach. I don't even know if we have good tests for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...