Page 14 of 23

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:37 pm
by Carl
bartbes wrote:This appears to be something related to output, can you tell us if it works when you run it as administrator? (if you want to, of course)
Just tested and yes it does work when running as admin.

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:45 pm
by Robin
I guess this means you guys really have to dump console output in home on Windows now.

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 1:44 am
by philnelson
Can someone walk me through building Love 0.6.0 on OS X?

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 4:07 pm
by bmelts
philnelson wrote:Can someone walk me through building Love 0.6.0 on OS X?
Okay!
  1. First, make sure you're running 10.5 or later. LÖVE 0.6.0 won't work on Tiger or earlier. And we haven't tested it on Snow Leopard yet as far as I know, but it should run without exploding too badly. No promises though.
  2. Next, make sure you have the Xcode Tools - you won't have much luck trying to build LÖVE without a compiler. If you still have your install DVDs handy, you should be able to install them from there - otherwise, you'll need to sign up for a (free) Apple Developer Connection account if you don't have one and download it from Apple's website (10.5, 10.6).
  3. Next step is grabbing the LÖVE 0.6.0 source - install the relevant version of Mercurial from http://mercurial.berkwood.com/ and clone the source repository by cracking open Terminal and typing (without quotes) 'hg clone http://love.hg.sourceforge.net:8000/hgroot/love/love' - this will create a "love" folder inside your home folder.
  4. One more thing to grab - frameworks. Several, in fact. Download them here - anything with .framework as its extension should be placed in /Library/Frameworks, while anything with a .dylib extension should go inside love/platform/macosx.
  5. Okay, finally we can actually start building! Inside the aforementioned macosx folder should be a file called love.xcodeproj - that's the file you want. Open it. Wait for Xcode to start up.
  6. Click "Build".
  7. Wait for it to compile.
  8. When it says "Build succeeded" at the bottom (and it will, hopefully - if it doesn't, mention it on IRC or on the forums or wherever), you'll be able to grab the actual, built application. Inside the aforementioned macosx folder, go to build, then Release. Inside Release is love.app - version 0.6.0, on Mac OS X, ready for use.
Good luck!

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 6:35 pm
by bartbes
Ah btw, rude, why aren't there any mac builds? Did you kick it out of your build chain?

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:35 pm
by Jasoco
Robin wrote:
Jasoco wrote:But when it comes, I will need as much help as possible to get my hefty chunk of code (The Adventure engine) working.
As long as your code doesn't depend too heavily on 0.5.0's quirks, that shouldn't be too hard.
What kind of quirks?

I know the main loop will need to be redone and I'll have to replace the commands for drawing and stuff and other things. But what quirks are there?

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:54 pm
by bmelts
bartbes wrote:Ah btw, rude, why aren't there any mac builds? Did you kick it out of your build chain?
iirc, rude doesn't have access to his mac right now. :emo:

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 8:42 pm
by Robin
Jasoco wrote:I know the main loop will need to be redone
You can write your own main loop in 0.6.0, but you don't need to.
Jasoco wrote:But what quirks are there?
For example the awfully bugged physics, or the fact that we now have string constants (LoveUI, for example, often depends on the values of those constants).

For the rest, it won't be that bad.

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:25 pm
by Jasoco
I don't use the physics.

I use constants like love.draw_fill and love.key_a and stuff though.

Re: 0.6.0 Update

Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 12:31 am
by Robin
Jasoco wrote:I use constants like love.draw_fill and love.key_a and stuff though.
Those are easily replaced. Alternatively, you could include constants.lua, that way you can still use the "classic" constants (or ease into string ones).