Wesnoth 1.1.5

Jack the Ripper · Post by **Jack the Ripper** » June 10th, 2006, 12:26 pm

@Yogi Bear: THX for the windows binaries!

Mana · Post by **Mana** » June 10th, 2006, 1:08 pm

thanks

Post by **lwa** » June 11th, 2006, 6:43 am

Here is my Mac OS X package. It should work on any mac (ppc or intel based) with Mac OS X at least 10.3.9

Full release (with editor) 69.4 Mb:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... g?download

Lite release (without musics and images arts) 39.4 Mb:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... g?download

Post by **Noy** » June 11th, 2006, 7:27 am

I love you, I love you, I love you, I love you... thank you.

Leo · Post by **Leo** » June 11th, 2006, 7:55 am

I hope we won't have 1.1.5a-windows

litium · Post by **litium** » June 11th, 2006, 5:07 pm

You can get the XDelta between 1.1.4 and 1.1.5 source code:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... rce.xdelta

how does this work?
is this a way to patch or something?

scott · Post by **scott** » June 11th, 2006, 5:36 pm

litium wrote:
You can get the XDelta between 1.1.4 and 1.1.5 source code:
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... rce.xdelta
how does this work?
is this a way to patch or something?

http://www.wesnoth.org/wiki/Download_Xd ... ource_code

Post by **Yogibear** » June 11th, 2006, 6:34 pm

Yogi Bear wrote: Because of performance checking we tried to use two different compilers to see which one does the better job. Unfortunately one of them still seems to cause some "anomalies". I will update you if it is available.

And here it is:

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... e?download

One note: This is solely to compare performance. There is some graphical glitches with minimizing and switching to other tasks and back. Just try to avoid doing that. If this build turns out to have a better performance, we most likely will take it and remove those things. But for now it is just to see if there is a significant effect.

I have tested it quickly and it feels indeed faster. Let's see what you think about it.

mjs-de · Post by **mjs-de** » June 11th, 2006, 7:13 pm

Ebuilds for Gentoo are ready !

Location has changed, because of Problems with my hoster.

http://www.dorf.wh.uni-dortmund.de/priv ... th-dev.tbz
http://www.dorf.wh.uni-dortmund.de/priv ... th-svn.tbz

_Seth_ · Post by **_Seth_** » June 14th, 2006, 8:27 am

Ebuilds for Gentoo are ready !

Thank you !

palloco · Post by **palloco** » June 14th, 2006, 1:17 pm

Yogi Bear wrote:windows binaries available:

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... e?download

Because of performance checking we tried to use two different compilers to see which one does the better job. Unfortunately one of them still seems to cause some "anomalies". I will update you if it is available.

This version does not even work, it brings this error:
"WESNOTH ejecutÃƒÂ³ una instrucciÃƒÂ³n no vÃƒÂ¡lida en el
mÃƒÂ³dulo WESNOTH.EXE de 0187:008ff12c.
Registros:
EAX=0000000a CS=0187 EIP=008ff12c EFLGS=00010202
EBX=00000066 SS=018f ESP=00edfc90 EBP=00edfd68
ECX=00000000 DS=018f ESI=8187eeb4 FS=0f77
EDX=00000000 ES=018f EDI=00000000 GS=0000
Bytes en CS:EIP:
,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x
Volcado de pila:
,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x "

Did you compiled it with SSE option or some windows XP libraries?
Would it be possible to have a version compiled with 3dnow! enabled?

K6-III 400 Mhz, AOpen AX59Pro, 256MB RAM, Voodoo 3 3000, windows 98SE

Splroink · Post by **Splroink** » June 15th, 2006, 3:52 pm

Hi all, Wesnoth newbie here.

I think I've narrowed down the performance problem I've been having. Here's my theory based on looking at the 1.1.4 code. I haven't tried 1.1.5 yet but this probably applies to it too.

Loading and saving games takes time proportional to the total number of units. I'm not sure why it takes so long to do each unit, but the total time can be around 30 seconds on my computer. Also, I think it autosaves after every side finishes its turn.

Now, this wouldn't be so bad if there was an "autosaving..." indication, or better, a progress bar. Still, I think the time to save each unit's data is the main bottleneck so I bet that can be optimized better.

BTW, I like the quality of the code very much. It's nice and clean and uses proper constness, exceptions, the STL, call-by-reference, etc. Good job guys! Oh, and the game itself is totally addictive.

Post by **gabba** » June 16th, 2006, 4:03 am

Yogi Bear wrote:
Yogi Bear wrote: Because of performance checking we tried to use two different compilers to see which one does the better job. Unfortunately one of them still seems to cause some "anomalies". I will update you if it is available.
And here it is:

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... e?download

One note: This is solely to compare performance. There is some graphical glitches with minimizing and switching to other tasks and back. Just try to avoid doing that. If this build turns out to have a better performance, we most likely will take it and remove those things. But for now it is just to see if there is a significant effect.

I have tested it quickly and it feels indeed faster. Let's see what you think about it.

For me the first build performs fine; in this one there are graphical artifacts and the screen flashes.

Polaris · Post by **Polaris** » June 17th, 2006, 11:02 am

palloco wrote:
Yogi Bear wrote:windows binaries available:

http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... e?download

Because of performance checking we tried to use two different compilers to see which one does the better job. Unfortunately one of them still seems to cause some "anomalies". I will update you if it is available.
This version does not even work, it brings this error:
"WESNOTH ejecutÃƒÂ³ una instrucciÃƒÂ³n no vÃƒÂ¡lida en el
mÃƒÂ³dulo WESNOTH.EXE de 0187:008ff12c.
Registros:
EAX=0000000a CS=0187 EIP=008ff12c EFLGS=00010202
EBX=00000066 SS=018f ESP=00edfc90 EBP=00edfd68
ECX=00000000 DS=018f ESI=8187eeb4 FS=0f77
EDX=00000000 ES=018f EDI=00000000 GS=0000
Bytes en CS:EIP:
,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x ,02x
Volcado de pila:
,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x ,08x "

Did you compiled it with SSE option or some windows XP libraries?
Would it be possible to have a version compiled with 3dnow! enabled?

K6-III 400 Mhz, AOpen AX59Pro, 256MB RAM, Voodoo 3 3000, windows 98SE

From the dump you provide, it seems that both the code and the stack are corrupted... May be a stack overflow problem that leads the execution into the data segment. Have you tried debugging the program?

flava_clown · Post by **flava_clown** » June 23rd, 2006, 2:38 pm

Yogi Bear wrote: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/wesn ... e?download

One note: This is solely to compare performance. There is some graphical glitches with minimizing and switching to other tasks and back. Just try to avoid doing that. If this build turns out to have a better performance, we most likely will take it and remove those things. But for now it is just to see if there is a significant effect.

I have tested it quickly and it feels indeed faster. Let's see what you think about it.

not for me, it was more a decrease than an increase of the performance. okay i could live with the flickering info texts from the menu, but the scrolling in the game doesn't deserve this name, it's a slideshow, around 1 frame per 3 seconds... in one word: unplayable!

i think one big problem with the saving is, that you save now much more informations than before. one unit have now every information you can think about. do we really need the movement costs for every single unit in a save game? or the residence? the max hp, max xp, alpha and what else? for what are the unit files then? and for what are the movement types? i mean in older save games there were only the necessary informations to a unit and things that aren't "normal" for this unit type.

anyway, since a lot of people don't want the autosave, what about to make it optional? what about an option that allows the player to disable the question if he/she want to save a replay (i have to click always no) and what about a quick save? which is quick, not like in the most games where quick means "quick to do" but not "quick with saving" ... i think a save game during the game like an autosave doesn't need the statistics from older scenarios nor other for the actual scenario unnecessary infos..

...

The Battle for Wesnoth Forums

Wesnoth 1.1.5

Gentoo ebuilds