[castor]

I was wondering, what would be the "optimal" fs2_open checkout when compiling for BtRL, considering the multiplayer in particular?
Should I use the latest from "fs2_open_3_6_9" branch or something older (with a date tag or..)?

[WMCoolmon]

fs2_open_3_6_9 was the build used with BtRL.

[taylor]

The code used for BtRL was customized for it and all of the changes aren't in CVS  (yet).  Various multiplayer changes in particular are not yet in CVS.  If you want the actually BtRL code then there should be a tarball available in the BtRL release thread.  If that doesn't work well for you then let me know and I'll put a fresh tarball up for download.

[WMCoolmon]

The code used for BtRL was customized for it and all of the changes aren't in CVS  (yet).  Various multiplayer changes in particular are not yet in CVS.  If you want the actually BtRL code then there should be a tarball available in the BtRL release thread.  If that doesn't work well for you then let me know and I'll put a fresh tarball up for download.

Oh, oops.

[karajorma]

The code used for BtRL was customized for it and all of the changes aren't in CVS  (yet).  Various multiplayer changes in particular are not yet in CVS.  If you want the actually BtRL code then there should be a tarball available in the BtRL release thread.  If that doesn't work well for you then let me know and I'll put a fresh tarball up for download.

Actually the only thing not committed so far is the -cap_object_update command line which I was discussing on email with you. Everything else is in. (Apart from a very ugly hack for TvT directives which I have no intention of committing and feel eternal shame that it ever even left my PC).


We really need those commit emails back.

[castor]

Ok, thanks for the clarification guys.

[castor]

Actually the only thing not committed so far is the -cap_object_update command line which I was discussing on email with you. Everything else is in. (Apart from a very ugly hack for TvT directives which I have no intention of committing and feel eternal shame that it ever even left my PC).

One more question though.. does this mean that 3.6.9 branch is currently safe to use in BtRL multi, i.e. there are no additional changes that could break something?
I understand that it might be hard to tell, when code is changing constantly, but If this indeed is the case I'd rather not mess with tarballs at all.

[karajorma]

The only problem with using the current source for multi is that it lacks -cap_object_update. I'll be adding that in an hour or so. Problem is that without it multi games can slow to a laggy crawl.

[castor]

I guess it means MP host is then able to cap client object updates. Very good

[karajorma]

Yep. And it's in now.