AW: [mupen64plus] mupen64plus won't start up

[Sven Eckelmann]

Try to read the documentation and notice that it doesn't have a gui. Then read a little bit more and notice that you have to add a Rom as parameter.

[William Shipley]

The easiest way to run the emulator IMO is to set up the ROMs to open using the emulator executable. That way, to play a game, you just double click on the file associated with it.

Not sure how easy that would be on windows, though (which, from what I see, you are probably using. Most Linux newbies end up using 1.5, which does have a gui)

On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:25 PM, Sven Eckelmann <sv...@narfation.org> wrote:

Try to read the documentation and notice that it doesn't have a gui. Then read a little bit more and notice that you have to add a Rom as parameter.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "mupen64plus" group.

To post to this group, send email to mupen...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mupen64plus...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mupen64plus?hl=en.

[Sven Eckelmann]

On Monday 01 October 2012 00:16:07 William Shipley wrote:
> The easiest way to run the emulator IMO is to set up the ROMs to open using
> the emulator executable. That way, to play a game, you just double click on
> the file associated with it.
>
> Not sure how easy that would be on windows, though (which, from what I see,
> you are probably using. Most Linux newbies end up using 1.5, which does
> have a gui)

I would not recommend using 1.5. Many bugs were fixed since 1.5 and we really
don't want to be blamed for old bugs. Maybe it is better to recommend the GUIs
wxmupen64plus/m64py. This should also help the developers of these GUIs
because they will not get any feedback without testers.

And we should also get rid of this urban myth that mupen64plus 1.99.x can not
be used with GUIs. We will never reach this point when we tell people about
the holy grail "mupen64plus 1.5" (which is definitely wrong).

Kind regards,
Sven