SQ79@liverpool.ac.UK (Mark Powell) (09/04/89)
Anyone had any joy compiling nethack3.0 under TOS, and I don't mean with that ridiculously large GCC thingy (I just wish I had 2.5 Megs really!!) I'm going to try with MWC and sozobon (if I ever get the thing to work.) Can anyone comment on their suitablity? And... If Eric Smith is out there... what did you compile 2.3e on??? Mark Powell ARPAnet : sq79%liv.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk USENET : ...!mcvax!ukc!liv.ac.uk!sq79
7103_300@uwovax.uwo.ca (09/05/89)
In article <8909040950.AA06992@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, SQ79@liverpool.ac.UK (Mark Powell) writes: > Anyone had any joy compiling nethack3.0 under TOS, and I don't mean with > that ridiculously large GCC thingy (I just wish I had 2.5 Megs really!!) > I'm going to try with MWC and sozobon (if I ever get the thing to work.) > Can anyone comment on their suitablity? > And... If Eric Smith is out there... what did you compile 2.3e on??? The current version of Sozobon won't compile NetHack. MWC probably would, but might need some tweaking. NetHack 3.0 patchlevel >= 1 will compile as distributed under TOS, if you have the GCC and at least 2 megs. I compiled nethack 2.3 with Laser, originally, and switched to the GCC later. Laser was a real pain to work with, and I found a lot of bugs both in the compiler and library (they may have fixed them in the latest version of Laser, but frankly the GCC is a better compiler and a lot cheaper!). All of this was done on a Mega 2. The next patch for NetHack is coming out this week, and I'll be mailing the TOS binaries to the moderator of comp.binaries.atari.st at that time. -- Eric R. Smith ersmith@uwovax.uwo.ca Dept. of Mathematics ersmith@uwovax.bitnet University of Western Ontario London, Ont.