maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) (05/27/89)
I had a bit of a problem getting nethack 2.3e running on my system. I tracked the problem down to the fact that nethack discards the TERMCAP environment variable if it does not begin with a "/" or a "\". (For my system, TERMCAP= C:\MISC\TERMCAP.) Here is a simple patch to make it accept all values of TERMCAP: at offset 5487Eh (346,238 dec) in NETHACK.EXE, change 74h to EBh. This forces it to accept any value of TERMCAP. (You did save BPE.EXE from comp.binaries. ibm.pc last week, didn't you? If not, ...) >ren nethack.exe nethack >debug nethack -r AX=0000 BX=0006 CX=B82E DX=0000 SP=FFEE BP=0000 SI=0000 DI=0000 DS=20F8 ES=20F8 SS=20F8 CS=20F8 IP=0100 NV UP EI PL NZ NA PO NC 20F8:0100 4D DEC BP -e 70f8:497e [note: 70f8 is DS + 5000] 70F8:497E 74.eb -w Writing 6B82E bytes -q >ren nethack nethack.exe > Happy Hacking, Mark Armbrust maa@nbires.nbi.com maa@nbires.UUCP
edlee@chinet.chi.il.us (Edward Lee) (05/28/89)
In article <401@nbires.nbi.com> maa@nbires.UUCP (Mark Armbrust) writes: > >I had a bit of a problem getting nethack 2.3e running on my system. I tracked >the problem down to the fact that nethack discards the TERMCAP environment >variable if it does not begin with a "/" or a "\". (For my system, TERMCAP= >C:\MISC\TERMCAP.) Here is a simple patch to make it accept all values of >TERMCAP: >[....] I discovered a simple way to eliminate the TERMCAP environment variable. All you have to do is create a subdirectory called ETC under the root directory and put the TERMCAP file in it. Once you run Nethack v2.3e, it will find the TERMCAP file even if the environment variable is not set. The program seems default to the Unix file directory convention. This slightly reduces the time required to start up Nethack. -Ed L
mhoffman@infocenter.UUCP (Mike Hoffman) (05/31/89)
in article <401@nbires.nbi.com>, maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) says: > > at offset 5487Eh (346,238 dec) in NETHACK.EXE, change 74h to EBh. ^ Mark goes on to say: > -e 70f8:497e [note: 70f8 is DS + 5000] > 70F8:497E 74.eb ^ Well, is it 5487E, or 5497E? We somehow haven't received Nethack at all yet (communications problems with our feeder) but I'll keep this on file and keep my fingers crossed :-) --- Michael J. Hoffman Voice: (407)255-8116 Manufacturing Engineering FAX: (407)255-8186 Encore Computer Corporation Email: mhoffman USnail: 100 N. Babcock St. UUCP: {uunet,codas!novavax,sun,pur-ee}!gould!mhoffman Melbourne, Fl 32935 "Curiouser and Curiouser" -- Alice in Wonderland
maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) (05/31/89)
In article <2415@infocenter.UUCP> mhoffman@infocenter.UUCP (Mike Hoffman) writes: >in article <401@nbires.nbi.com>, maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) says: >> >> at offset 5487Eh (346,238 dec) in NETHACK.EXE, change 74h to EBh. > ^ > >Mark goes on to say: >> -e 70f8:497e [note: 70f8 is DS + 5000] >> 70F8:497E 74.eb > ^ > >Well, is it 5487E, or 5497E? The OFFSET in the file is 5487Eh. This is the number that you need if you are using a binary file editor like BPE to do the patch. When you load a file into memory using the DEBUG command, the file is loaded starting at DS:100h; therefore, you need to add 100h to the file offset to get the memory address to patch. Since the offset is greater than FEFFh, you also need too compute the segment address as noted above. if you compare the posted/patched files using "FC /B", the miscompare will be at the correct file offset. Hope this clear things up. Mark Armbrust maa@nbires.nbi.com maa@nbires.UUCP -- Mark Armbrust maa@nbires.nbi.com maa@nbires.UUCP
kevin@kosman.UUCP (Kevin O'Gorman) (05/31/89)
In article <2415@infocenter.UUCP> mhoffman@infocenter.UUCP (Mike Hoffman) writes: >in article <401@nbires.nbi.com>, maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) says: >> >> at offset 5487Eh (346,238 dec) in NETHACK.EXE, change 74h to EBh. ... >Well, is it 5487E, or 5497E? The original article never made it here. What was this supposed to fix? There are a couple of candidates I would really like to see fixed: all those random commas on the screen (seems to be related to monster motion out of sight of the adventurer), and running into all those nasty Xorn on level 2. The Xorn really get me -- they keep running me into a horde of Orcs. While I'm at it: a burning question: are those folks who claim a 50% win rate for real? I thought I was pretty good, but I'm content if I get 50% of my characters to the level where they can take on Orc hordes without worry: i.e. about 50% of my games get interesting. One in a few hundred is a win. There just seem to be too many random ways to die: impassable ghost levels, Xorn on level 2, lucky hits by the first monster of the game, system shocks, freshly created acid blobs blocking the only retreat, etc, etc. I think I could improve the score only a little by being fanatically careful and calculating, but that would take the fun out of it for me, since I'm more of a barbarian type myself. Anyone care to tell me what I'm missing?
steve@eros.ame.arizona.edu (Steve Cannon) (06/01/89)
In article <401@nbires.nbi.com> maa@nbires.UUCP (Mark Armbrust) writes: >I had a bit of a problem getting nethack 2.3e running on my system. ... Besides the aforementioned problem, I found no instructions on how to use nethack or what it does. Is figuring out it's functionality a part of the test of installing it, or were instructions posted elsewhere that I missed? For anyone who is willing to take the e-mail time to help me out - Thanks! (My appologies to those I may have let down by not figuring this out on my own.) Steve Cannon <X> UUCP: ...{uunet,allegra,cmc12,hao!noao,att}!arizona!eros!steve AME Dept. <XXXXXXXXXX> Internet: eros!steve@ARIZONA.EDU University of Arizona <X> Bitnet: scannon@arizrvax Tucson, AZ 85721 <X> Phone: +1 602 621 6091
hartung@amos.ling.ucsd.edu (Jeff Hartung) (06/02/89)
In article <779@kosman.UUCP> kevin@kosman.UUCP (Root) writes: >There are a couple of candidates I would really like to see fixed: all those >random commas on the screen (seems to be related to monster motion out of >sight of the adventurer), and running into all those nasty Xorn on level 2. >The Xorn really get me -- they keep running me into a horde of Orcs. I'm not really sure about the Xorn on level 2 that occasionally shows up (although I'm pretty sure where in the code this problem might come from), but the random comma chars can be cleared up by changing the 39 value of the GRAPHICS option in 'nethack.cnf' to 32. >I think I could improve the score only a little by being fanatically careful >and calculating, but that would take the fun out of it for me, since I'm >more of a barbarian type myself. > >Anyone care to tell me what I'm missing? Although I have it on good authority that this "feature" will be gone from version 3.0 (whenever it comes out), you can greatly improve your score by using the #sacrifice command more (which raises your luck). Edible things with a food value over 500 will work for this. ANY food item (hint hint :-) --Jeff Hartung-- Disclaimer: My opinions only, etc., etc., BLAH! BLAH! BLAH!... ARPA - hartung@amos.ucsd.edu UUCP - ucsd!amos.ucsd.edu!hartung
fisher@sc2a.unige.ch (Markus Fischer) (06/06/89)
In article <2415@infocenter.UUCP>, mhoffman@infocenter.UUCP (Mike Hoffman) writes: > in article <401@nbires.nbi.com>, maa@nbires.nbi.com (Mark Armbrust) says: >> >> at offset 5487Eh (346,238 dec) in NETHACK.EXE, change 74h to EBh. > ^ > Mark goes on to say: >> -e 70f8:497e [note: 70f8 is DS + 5000] >> 70F8:497E 74.eb > ^ > Well, is it 5487E, or 5497E? It's at offset 5487E ! But debug loads the file at DS:0100 (for the *.com PSP) or in other words, DS is at file-start -100h. In this example, the file starts at 20F8:0100. Markus Fischer -|--|--|--|--|--|--I Department of Anthropology -|--|--|--|--|--|--|-(#)-I University of Geneva -|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|-(#)-|-(#)(#)(_)-I CH-1227 Carouge (GE) -&-(_)-|--|--|-(#)-&--|-(#)(#)(_)(#)-&-(_)(#)-I Switzerland -|--|--|--|--|-(#)(_)-|-(_)(_)(_)(#)-I black (#) to kill ! --|--|-(#)(_)(_)(_)(#)(#)(_)(_) fisher@sc2a.unige.ch =+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+==+=(#)=+ fisher@cgeuge52.bitnet