Searching for Glulx/Glk interpreters on 64-bit linux boxes

148 views
Skip to first unread message

minus...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 4, 2008, 5:34:49 PM4/4/08
to
Hi all,
Sorry for this lousy Google Groups post.
I'm trying to run a Glulx interpreter (either glulxe or git) on
the 64-bit machines of my School, running a distro of Linux, which I
guess is pretty much Redhat. Compiling it with glkterm and cheapglk
without modification won't work, as the glk library tells me:
Compile-time error: glui32 is not a 32-bit value. Please fix glk.h.
I complied with the requirement by modifying glui32 and its signed
counterpart to ints rather than longs. Then it outputs:
git: compiler.c:80: initCompiler: Assertion `sizeof(HashNode) <=
sizeof(PatchNode)' failed.
or
Compile-time error: Pointers cannot fit in a glui32. Start writing
hashtable code.
So from what I had understood, does most of the existent Glulx
interpreters work on the assumption that sizeof(glui32)==sizeof(void
*)? (The yet-to-be-written hashtable code will map pointers to longs?)
Thanks,
Xun Gong

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
Apr 4, 2008, 6:15:35 PM4/4/08
to

I'm not sure what Git does internally.

The Glulxe interpreter (which is the reference code base) does *not*
assume that (although I think either GlkTerm or CheapGlk does). Glulxe
should compile on anything.

--Z

--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
Bush's biggest lie is his claim that it's okay to disagree with him. As soon as
you *actually* disagree with him, he sadly explains that you're undermining
America, that you're giving comfort to the enemy. That you need to be silent.

minus...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 4, 2008, 7:56:26 PM4/4/08
to
On Apr 5, 12:15 am, Andrew Plotkin <erkyr...@eblong.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what Git does internally.
>
> The Glulxe interpreter (which is the reference code base) does *not*
> assume that (although I think either GlkTerm or CheapGlk does). Glulxe
> should compile on anything.
Thanks. I'll try to hack CheapGlk up a bit.

Nikos Chantziaras

unread,
Apr 4, 2008, 8:09:01 PM4/4/08
to
minus...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Apr 5, 12:15 am, Andrew Plotkin <erkyr...@eblong.com> wrote:
>> I'm not sure what Git does internally.
>>
>> The Glulxe interpreter (which is the reference code base) does *not*
>> assume that (although I think either GlkTerm or CheapGlk does). Glulxe
>> should compile on anything.
> Thanks. I'll try to hack CheapGlk up a bit.

If all else fails, you can also try to compile as 32-bit (-m32 GCC
switch), if you don't mind installing 32-bit versions of X11 and
whatever else is needed.

Fergus Mcneill

unread,
Apr 5, 2008, 6:02:07 AM4/5/08
to

"Andrew Plotkin" <erky...@eblong.com> wrote in message
news:ft69a7$2ct$3...@reader2.panix.com...

> Here, minus...@gmail.com <minus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm not sure what Git does internally.
>
> The Glulxe interpreter (which is the reference code base) does *not*
> assume that (although I think either GlkTerm or CheapGlk does). Glulxe
> should compile on anything.
>
> --Z
>
> --
> "And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the
> borogoves..."
> *
> Bush's biggest lie is his claim that it's okay to disagree with him. As
> soon as
> you *actually* disagree with him, he sadly explains that you're
> undermining
> America, that you're giving comfort to the enemy. That you need to be
> silent.

Andrew take off your annoying Sig files. They waste bandwidth and very
unfunny. Everyone is moaning about them.
You've been warned.

Moderator.


minus...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 5, 2008, 6:50:34 AM4/5/08
to
On Apr 5, 12:02 pm, "Fergus Mcneill" <CiderKni...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Andrew take off your annoying Sig files. They waste bandwidth and very
> unfunny. Everyone is moaning about them.
> You've been warned.
>
> Moderator.

lol. But not too funny in fact either.

Fergus Mcneill

unread,
Apr 5, 2008, 9:52:57 AM4/5/08
to

<minus...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e92e5597-c1cf-45f2...@e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...

I'm not laughing. I've got my eye on you. You best behave or your barred.
Too many people on here begging for a ban.


Avery

unread,
May 14, 2008, 4:34:57 PM5/14/08
to
On Apr 4, 6:56 pm, "minus27...@gmail.com" <minus27...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Apr 5, 12:15 am, Andrew Plotkin <erkyr...@eblong.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not sure what Git does internally.
>
> > The Glulxe interpreter (which is the reference code base) does *not*
> > assume that (although I think either GlkTerm or CheapGlk does). Glulxe
> > should compile on anything.
>
> Thanks. I'll try to hack CheapGlk up a bit.

Did you ever do this successfully? I'm Googling all the errors I'm
getting and I only get your post, over and over.

Avery

Michael Martin

unread,
May 14, 2008, 8:02:49 PM5/14/08
to
On May 14, 1:34 pm, Avery <ave...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Did you ever do this successfully? I'm Googling all the errors I'm
> getting and I only get your post, over and over.

I had the same problems with GlkTerm and just went -m32. I can't get
XGlk or Garglk to build at all, though Garglk (32-bit) binaries work
fine.

--Michael

Andrew Plotkin

unread,
May 19, 2008, 12:17:38 AM5/19/08
to

I did not get to this issue... until I got email this weekend from
David Leverton (who was packaging up IF code for Gentoo). He noticed
that I did this work (making all the Glk code 64-bit-pointer-safe)
*years* ago -- but I forgot to delete the safety test in the glkterm
source.

Whoops.

So whack out the "writing hashtable code" check in glkterm/main.c
line 55. It's unnecessary. And then you should be able to compile it.

--Z

--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*

If the Bush administration hasn't thrown you in military prison without trial,
it's for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because you're an American.

peersc...@gmx.net

unread,
Jun 5, 2008, 7:59:21 AM6/5/08
to

Thanks to Zarf for the suggestion. I turned that suggestion into a
patch. It is available from here:
http://www.wolldingwacht.de/if/glkterm/
I succesfully compiled glkterm (und subsequently glulxe) on a 64 bit
Linux box running Debian "Lenny"/testing. Works fine.
Feedback appreciated.

Peer

Michael Martin

unread,
Jun 5, 2008, 8:44:14 PM6/5/08
to
On Jun 5, 4:59 am, peerschae...@gmx.net wrote:
> I succesfully compiled glkterm (und subsequently glulxe) on a 64 bit
> Linux box running Debian "Lenny"/testing. Works fine.
> Feedback appreciated.

Using your patch, I've just successfully built it on Fedora 9 on
AMD64.

Thanks for the patch!

--Michael

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages