Patch 5
Izchak Miller
It will include:
1. Fixes to the bugs we allowed into Patch 4. We goofed there, and
we appologize for the troubles you have with it.
2. Many other bug fixes.
3. A Mac port submitted by Johnny Lee. Like the VMS port, the Mac port
may still need some tweaking.
3. A new eating code, allowing for timeout. This code required a
re-writing of eat.c. It is a complex code, and it took us a long time
to debug and stabilize it. We will not be surprised if wrinkles will
still show up in it, despite our preventive efforts.
A few comments:
A new doors display code is being tested. An overlay under MS-DOS is
being tested. Both will be included in Patch 6 (hopefully).
To our knowledge, no additional ports are in the works.
Some people implemented their ideas, and mailed us diffs. We were
delighted to receive them. But a word of caution: please tell us in
advance of what you plan on doing. There is no point in duplicate
efforts, and there is no point in doing something we don't feel we
can accept.
Some people have complained about patches not patching cleanly. It is,
perhaps, worth reminding you to apply the patches to _mint_ code.
Save your customized files, and replace them with release files before
applying the patches. Then re-customize the necessary files. That
goes for config.h, the make files, and any other file you touched. We
fully test the patches, and we do not release them unless they patch
cleanly.
For the development team,
-Izchak
Fubar
Let me get this straight... patches are applied to nethack 3.0 NONPATCHED code?
So if i have a patchlevel 4 game here, i should DUMP it, reload FRESH code
and then patch it with 5?
Minor confusion...
--
Sig: ++Christopher(); | "I am not nuts. I am condements.
Internet: cam...@polyslo.calpoly.edu | I was promoted last thursday!"
Also: ch...@fubarsys.slo.ca.us |
Bix: cambler | Support joint US/USSR trip to Mars.
Jeff d'Arcy
> So if i have a patchlevel 4 game here, i should DUMP it, reload FRESH code
> and then patch it with 5?
No. You want to start with code that *has* had patchlevels 1-4 applied and
that has *not* had any other modifications. The warning about "clean" code
is for those of us who "customize" our versions instead of just building the
vanilla distribution versions.
Jeff d'Arcy jda...@encore.com "Quack!"
Encore has provided the medium, but the message remains my own
Kevin Darcy
>cam...@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Fubar):
>> So if i have a patchlevel 4 game here, i should DUMP it, reload FRESH code
>> and then patch it with 5?
>
>No. You want to start with code that *has* had patchlevels 1-4 applied and
>that has *not* had any other modifications. The warning about "clean" code
>is for those of us who "customize" our versions instead of just building the
>vanilla distribution versions.
>
(Do I know you? :-)
Jeff, I think the main purpose of the warning was to ensure that gm's would
reverse the "stopgap" shop patch before applying Patch 5. As you know, not
doing so causes the patch to not apply quite correctly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Darcy, Asst. Unix Systems Admin. | +1 313 948 4863
ke...@cfctech.UUCP | Chrysler Financial Corp.
kevin%cfctec...@mailgw.cc.umich.edu | MIS, Technical Services
{sharkey|mailrus}!cfctech!kevin | 27777 Franklin, Southfield, MI 48034
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You are getting more and more confused...--More--
psycho op
correctly, but i may have found a bug. In an armor shop, I picked up
something, was billed for it, and when I dropped the unpaid weapon I got
paid as if I had dropped something I owned. Picked up crystilline plate
mail (800 sir) dropped it and got 400 for it, did it again, and legally
bought the armor with my ill-gotten dinero. I thought this was a bug that
was fixed in the earlier patches. I haven't done any modifications to the
originall source and have applied everything but the stop-gap patch
after patch4. Am I doing something wrong is have I really discovered
a bug here?
--
David Ruby Internet: daver%uxa.cso....@uxc.cso.uiuc.edu
University of Illinois --- Champaign, Illinois
"I give in to sin, because I like to practice what I preach."
Jim Budler
} In article <10...@encore.Encore.COM> jda...@multimax.UUCP (Jeff d'Arcy) writes:
} >cam...@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU (Fubar):
} >> So if i have a patchlevel 4 game here, i should DUMP it, reload FRESH code
} >> and then patch it with 5?
} >
} >No. You want to start with code that *has* had patchlevels 1-4 applied and
} >that has *not* had any other modifications. The warning about "clean" code
} >is for those of us who "customize" our versions instead of just building the
} >vanilla distribution versions.
} >
} (Do I know you? :-)
} Jeff, I think the main purpose of the warning was to ensure that gm's would
} reverse the "stopgap" shop patch before applying Patch 5. As you know, not
} doing so causes the patch to not apply quite correctly.
Unfortunately, you also have to use non-localized versions of
include/config.h, and for others, but not patch 5, auxil/nethack.sh
and include/unixconf.sh.
Since these are always, or often modified, even in an almost vanilla
installation, I wish the source and the patches came out with -dist
versions of these, similar to the Makefile.* in the distribution.
jim
--
Jim Budler j...@eda.com ...!{decwrl,uunet}!eda!jim
compuserve: 72415,1200 applelink: D4619
voice: +1 408 986-9585 fax: +1 408 748-1032
Stephen Jacobs
Well, there are starting to be a fair number of cries of agony concerning the
general hellishness of so many patch sets. I'd add 'so many large patch sets'.
Any comment from the Frozzbozz Magic Amulet of Yendor Company about the rate
of continuing fixes, and when there might be a new base distribution?
Steve J.