On Sun, Jun 02, 2019 at 06:34:22AM +0200, zeurkous@volny.cz wrote:
[...]
> Mehasn't been monitoring dosbox development much, due to the lack of
> Code quality and indeed plain English quality... mewas thus unaware of
> the fork and will investigate, thanks for bringing it me attention.
[...]
Hi,
Attached is the tarball of the most recent dosbox-x built against
system SDL1 for testing and comments.
- fullscreen resolution isn't automatically detected and fails with the
standard settings. I manually set 'fullresolution=1920x1080' in
the dosbox-x.conf
- configure stage checks g++ even though it's never used (I grepped
through the build log). Would appreciate if someone knows a
straightforward way to disable this.
- This is built with dynamic core and USE_WXNEEDED=Yes for testing
purposes.
- I have not tested voodoo emulation with this version. I tested that
about a year ago and back then it was only partial and not really
usable without severe graphics distortions.
- I haven't tested running Windows 95/98 in this version, but with a
previous one from about a year ago. It worked reasonably well with
non-3D-accelerated applications. I even got the game Deus Ex from
the year 2000 to launch, but no playable 3D graphics. Some highly
unofficial resources on running Win9x in dosbox (and dosbox-x) can
be found here: http://dosbox95.darktraveler.com/index.html
I would like comments, tests, numbers (videos ??) about the performance
advantage of dynamic core over normal core before deciding about the
best configuration for the port. I'm doing some testing at the moment,
but there are so many use cases and configurations that I would
appreciate hearing from others' experiences with the difference between
normal and dynamic core. I would prefer to avoid wxneeded unless the
performance advantage is clear and significant.
No comments:
Post a Comment