Re: Windows port (was Re: hey listen to this!!!!!)

["James R. Dunson" <jdunson at vt dot edu>]

At 07:15 AM 7/7/00 -0700, Stan Shebs wrote:
>I take it the free version of cygwin is
>problematic somehow?

  My ignorance is showing; the last I'd heard cygwin couldn't even 
compile itself (let alone a complex, multi-window, pseudo-real-time, 
networked game like Xconq), and seemed to be stalled in that state.  
I've just had a look at their site, and it seems to be in a much 
better state now.  

  However... the Xconq site is certainly not helping here.  I don't 
see any mention of what compilers it compiles under, only limited 
discussion of OSs, no comments as to whether it needs optional 
packages or libraries, etc.  And the fact that there doesn't exist
a downloadable executable version of the current final release 
suggests strongly to the casual observer that it is at the very 
least not easy to compile.  

  Up until recently, a "Windows port" frequently meant that it could 
only be compiled using compilers that were very non-free (in either 
the beer or the speech sense); if Xconq can be gotten running from 
scratch on W95/98/NT/2k for nothing more than a few minutes of 
download time, the homepage should point this out, and ideally give
some instructions and links (probably on a sub-page).  

** James **
P.S.  I've currently got easy access to NT4.0sp6a, and W98.  The 
NT is fairly stable, the 98 is semi-stable.  
-- 
James R. Dunson (jdunson@vt.edu)
Network Administrator, Center for Wireless Telecommunications
436 Whittemore Hall, Virginia Tech     http://www.cwt.vt.edu/