Search found 14 matches
- Mon Sep 17, 2012 1:12 pm
- Forum: Development
- Topic: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
- Replies: 7
- Views: 36652
Re: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
In general, your flags look odd. -g? -O2? These belong to the standard build flags in Debian. Anyway, thanks for your analysis. For the time being, I just removed the trailing -O1 from the parsegen command line. This has the same effect as the Fedora patch, which avoinds compilation inside parsegen...
- Mon Sep 10, 2012 11:02 am
- Forum: Development
- Topic: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
- Replies: 7
- Views: 36652
Re: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
I find that extremely odd. Can you paste for me the line it's trying to use to compile with? ./parsegen -D__UNIXSDL__ -D__OPENGL__ -gcc gcc -compile -flags "-g -O2 -fstack-protector --param=ssp-buffer-size=4 -Wformat -Werror=format-security -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2 -pipe -I. -I/usr/local/include -I...
- Tue Sep 04, 2012 1:55 pm
- Forum: Development
- Topic: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
- Replies: 7
- Views: 36652
Re: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
Regarding the patch to parsegen, we know that such a change will cause certain versions of GCC to produce invalid code with certain system CFLAGS. You'll note that not only does parsegen compile internally, but after the CFLAGS it adds to the end -O1. We found certain versions of GCC were producing...
- Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:56 am
- Forum: Development
- Topic: Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
- Replies: 7
- Views: 36652
Patches to compile with CPPFLAGS=-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2
Dear ZSNES devs, I'd like to get your (dis)approval for a patch set that I am about to apply to the zsnes package in Debian. The underlying problem is that Debian encourages to build package with "hardening build flags", i.e. compiler flags that add security-related features like stack pro...
- Tue Jul 24, 2012 10:44 am
- Forum: Controller Help
- Topic: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
- Replies: 7
- Views: 10131
Re: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
Sure, but in the end, for the 20EUR that it cost me, I'd buy it again and recommend it anytime. Although I also doubt that it's made by Buffalo, but the overall quality is decent enough.Gil_Hamilton wrote:Also, the adapter opens up a swath of alternatives, like an AsciiPad or a Super Advantage.
- Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:42 am
- Forum: Controller Help
- Topic: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
- Replies: 7
- Views: 10131
Re: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
Maybe, maybe not... so?paulguy wrote:The stuffness will probably loosen up, but overall, it may not wear well. It may quickly get loose/mushy.
- Thu Jul 19, 2012 8:56 am
- Forum: Controller Help
- Topic: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
- Replies: 7
- Views: 10131
Re: Buffalo SNES usb pad, who has one and is it any good?
But I'd like to get an opinion from someone who actually owns one of these pads... I just wanna know if it feels anywhere close to what a real SNES pad feels like and how durable it is. I just got mine yesterday - bought it on ebay for around 20EUR from a HK retailer and had to wait three weeks for...
- Wed Jul 18, 2012 8:11 am
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
Re: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branc
In general, we look at Debian and Gentoo patches from time to time. Fine, that's good to know. Fedora resp. RPM Fusion is also often worth a look: http://cvs.rpmfusion.org/viewvc/rpms/zsnes/devel/?root=free While we are at it: 1) Could you please add the zsnes.xpm file into the src/icons directory?...
- Tue Jul 17, 2012 10:18 am
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Save Files Location
- Replies: 10
- Views: 24139
Re: Save Files Location
On my system, the save state is saved in the same directory as the ROM with a .zst file extension.
- Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:21 pm
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
- Wed Jul 11, 2012 12:19 pm
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
Re: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branc
I actually gave out a v1.51c with a couple of more fixes. Really, where? I couldn't find it. I might also add that some of the patches in Debian's tree are wrong. Please point me to the wrong patches: http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/zsnes/1.510+bz2-3 Does anyone else know the answers to the...
- Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:38 am
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
Re: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branc
I actually gave out a v1.51c with a couple of more fixes. Really, where? I couldn't find it. I might also add that some of the patches in Debian's tree are wrong. Please point me to the wrong patches: http://patch-tracker.debian.org/package/zsnes/1.510+bz2-3 v1.51b is a nice bet in the interim. I t...
- Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:36 am
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
Re: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branc
There is no gain in that version over 1.51b, which actually has some later work backported into it. So 1.51b is to be prefered over r4538. That's good to know, thank you! the latest revision (r5218) (r5305) I was talking about the "stable" branch, not trunk. - Are there any known regressi...
- Wed Jul 04, 2012 2:41 pm
- Forum: ZSNES Talk
- Topic: Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
- Replies: 14
- Views: 17547
Update Debian packages: 1.51b, svn4538, svn stable branch?
Hi ZSNES devs, I'd like to help out maintaining the zsnes 1.51 package in Debian. The package is in an overall good shape, but patches are piling up and I'd like to get the source code a bit updated. I currently see three possibilities to do so: 1) Package the 1.51b release, which was more or less i...