First post, by Leonard
I am making CVS builds of DOSBox.
Here you will have *FREE* access to these builds:
http://membres.lycos.fr/aubioane/dosbox/
Please note that these builds are *not* official and *not* supported by the DOSBox authors.
Leo.
I am making CVS builds of DOSBox.
Here you will have *FREE* access to these builds:
http://membres.lycos.fr/aubioane/dosbox/
Please note that these builds are *not* official and *not* supported by the DOSBox authors.
Leo.
thanks!!
Don't be so hard
Hey, thanks! 😁
Thankyou very much! 😁
Hey, thanks man, but I can't make it work... it asks me for a file, do I have to install something prior to use this build?
Oops, yes: you must have sdl.dll either in the dosbox executable's directory or in %windir%\system32 (%windir% is usually c:\windows)...
I updated the archive for others 😉
Leo.
It keeps asking me for a file, and I have it! And it still moans about it
msvcp60.dll
I searched my hard drive and found it like 50 times, and each time the same version so it must be standard so why is it nagging for it ?
@Leo
Your builds are a few weeks out of date. And I'd recommend you changing the Build date on your Zips so that it doesn't confuse anybody who is relying on your Builds.
Also you don't have PNG screenshot support since I don't see the necessary libpng12.dll needed for this to work.
Ieremiou
----------
Helping Debug DOSBox.
Hi,
Firstly, if I may say that the only reason that the date would confuse anyone is if they think that the month should be written before the day (MM/DD/YY). This is an American-only custom, as every other country that follows the Gregorian calendar writes the day first (DD/MM/YY), and I think those countries that follow the Julian calendar do this, too. It even makes sense just thinking about it:
The first number (Day) increases, once it has gone as high as it can, it wraps around to one, and the second number (Month) is increased. Once the second number has increased to maximum, the third number (Year) increases. Try thinking like this in the American way, and it can be a little confusing.
I have also conversed with Leo, and because he uses MSVC 6, he needs to configure things in an odd way, so it may take a while before all the features are fully implemented. However, I am currently investigating the use of Cygwin to compile it, possibly automatically every day, week, or whatever may be possible.
Leo didn't realise that he left the debug switch on for the compiler, so some people may experience the MSVCP60D.DLL error. Notice the "D" at the end, this means a debug version of the library. Alternate Debug DLL files are available here. Download the "Supplemental DLL" files, and place MSVCP60D.DLL and MSVCRTD.DLL in the directory of DOSBOX.EXE. This will be fixed the next time Leo releases another CVS build, but because he lacks time, that could be a little while.
Please be patient for improvements, and do not hesitate to contact Leo for any enquiries.
E-Horn
The date indicated by the ZIP name is three weeks old, a week older than the date of the DOSBox.exe file in the ZIP, which is two weeks out of date. So priestlyboy is not off on his comment about the date.
If I'm not mistaken, the source is still 05/06/04, even though it has a creation date of 12/06/04. Just because the file was created on the 12th does not mean it was using that date for the source. I do know that he put a new ZIP file on the Internet, with the same CVS date afterwards, now including SDL.DLL and SDL_Net.DLL, even though the latter is not used in his build. Leo says this in a previous post, using the name Leo2. Perhaps Leo recompiled the source then, or even just copied the EXE file on his computer.
E-Horn
Here in Sweden we write it in YYMMDD 😁 I belive that's the ISO way of doing it, but I'm not 100% sure.
I have renamed MSVCP60.DLL to MSVCP60D.DLL and it works too 😉
For ISO it needs 4 digit years. This is also how the Japs do it. Makes sense to me from a logical point of view with least specific to most specific going left to right.
Yes, it does make sense to write most significant number (ie, 1 in 1234) first, then least significant last (4 in 1234), but as most people know, the date has been written the other way around, at least in the countries that created the current calendars. There is an ISO standard on this, but you have to pay just to read it! I thought standards were supposed to be free, so people didn't have to pay royalties to be able to conform. It says something along the lines of: YYYY-MM-DDThh🇲🇲ss.sTZD
Now is 2004-06-29T13:00:00.0+10:00 for when I wrote this example. (29th of the 06th 2004, at 1 PM, GMT+10 hours) You can also drop most of it depending on how accurate you want to be.
E-Horn