EVE Search - Linux client, where art thou!?

All Channels

EVE Technology Lab

Linux client, where art thou!?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 3 post(s)
Solbright altaltalt	Posted - 2007.08.12 15:02:00 - [31] Get a life. Native is in the eye of the beholder. Here's your link.
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2007.08.13 00:29:00 - [32] Originally by: Solbright altaltalt Get a life. Native is in the eye of the beholder. Here's your link. No, that's beauty. Native Client has an actual meaning. Those of us based in reality choose to use proper definitions, since words mean things. A Native Linux Client runs without the use of a compatibility layer such as Cedega or Wine. It comes either as a source tarball that must be compiled with a tool such as GCC, or comes in a binary format such as .rpm or .deb. It CAN be a ported version of a windows program, but it is NOT a windows program in and of itself. A windows program that only runs with a compatibility layer is NOT a Native Linux client. to call it such is to bastardize the meaning of the term and to promote ignorance of proper terminology. However, I do thank you for the link. that is the one I was looking for: Quote: We will deliver the same binaries on all platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac OS X) and work on compatibility. TransGaming will then create special installers for Linux and Mac OS X as well as platform specific patches/updates. Don't know how the financial aspect or subscription details will be handled (but that will become clear when we release, not my department though). The SAME binaries. No porting, no source code, no linux-specific binary, NO NATIVE CLIENT. It can't be clearer than that. As a side note, I was VERY glad to see this added by CCP to the linked thread: Quote: Just a clarification on the 'paying extra' for EVE on Cedega. You will pay the same price for EVE on Linux/Mac as you pay for EVE on Windows. Same Monthly subscription fees. The Cedega/Cider builds that back the EVE release will be locked to those products. Repeat. You will only be paying the same monthly fee for EVE on the new platforms. No extra fees will be charged for running on these platform. So at least we won't be paying extra. Honestly, that was my biggest beef with the whole thing. I really didn't like the idea of paying more just to play on Linux. All terminology arguments aside, Ultimately I really am not overly concerned if we get a native client or a wrapped client, as long as it doesn't cost me any more. Besides, a wrapped client is the next step towards a native client once gaming companies see the market for linux games take off. So it's all good now.
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.13 12:39:00 - [33] Originally by: Bish Ounen Native Client has an actual meaning. Those of us based in reality choose to use proper definitions, since words mean things. I tossed up on replying but had a recording to watch so ... As the computing world has been dragged into the free-market world, where monopolies rule the roost, you get a situation where there is basically one hardware platform and one OS structure. Any upstarts are either ignored or conform to the "one". End result is you get so much commonality that true porting is no longer needed. Instead, a bunch of translation libs servers the purpose. And when said libs are included in the install files of the app, what's to say it's not just another lib? Admittedly, Wine is truly a massive undertaking but that is more a sign of todays bloated OSes than anything else.
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.13 12:57:00 - [34] Hell, an interpreted program is less native than a Wine'd one.

CCP Lingorm	Posted - 2007.08.14 08:27:00 - [35] PLease look at : This thread CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader

Sevarus James Minmatar Meridian Dynamics FREGE Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.14 10:55:00 - [36] I think its actually a moot point (native vs. "wine'd"). If the performance differences are neglible, and the application RUNS on the Operating System you choose rather than have chosen for you... Then its all good. Even better from my perspective is seeing a MASSIVE uptick in interest in these non "ms" platforms. In my corp there are 4 linux users. Looking at the posts in these threads in the tech forum, as well as the general "flame wars", I'd say, as a percentage, we are getting noticed, and thats a great thing. It would be my hope regardless of the "native" status of EVE, that CCP realizes the potential market, and with the WOD IP, they rethink their "directx only" path and use a true cross platform philosophy when designing future products. Ubuntu 3d Beryl-Linux Desktop+EVE
UberL0rd Minmatar Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.08.14 12:00:00 - [37] Originally by: Sevarus James I think its actually a moot point (native vs. "wine'd"). Well - wrong! If it's native then it stands a reasonable change of running on non x86 based hardware or in x86_64 native mode. And as a Gentoo/FreeBSD developer I'll be running 3 layers of emulation when FreeBSD 7.0 comes out as it will support my laptops graphics card AND should work with the Gentoo toolchain on amd64 (it doesn't for 6.2) So the code path will be EVE (Windows) -> WINE/CEDEGA -> Linux Emulator on FreeBSD. That will be interesting --- Gentoo/FreeBSD/Linux developer
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.14 12:43:00 - [38] Originally by: UberL0rd If it's native then it stands a reasonable change of running on non x86 based hardware ... Good try but no. Source level compatibility is all about removing native requirements, not enforcing them.
UberL0rd Minmatar Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.08.14 14:04:00 - [39] Originally by: Solbright Originally by: UberL0rd If it's native then it stands a reasonable change of running on non x86 based hardware ... Good try but no. Source level compatibility is all about removing native requirements, not enforcing them. Maybe you misunderstood. EVE Native Windows client (what we have now) requires Windows. EVE on Linux is made for Windows. Windows requries x86 , so EVE On Linux requires x86. [1] This is where we are now, even with the CCP announcement. EVE Native Linux client requires Linux EVE on Linux is made for Linux. Linux requires x86, x86_64, alpha, mips, sparc, powerpc, superh, m68k, s390 - and a few others I've no doubt missed. So with a native EVE Linux client, CCP could in theory release binaries for the above platforms running Linux. Of course, it's not that simple as you have endian issues, signed issues, etc. This is not helped that the simple fact that as Windows is x86 only [1] it's probably developed with the endianess and signedness of x86. So taking all that into consideration, how am I enforcing native requirements beyond what there already are? [1] Of course you can get 64-bit Windows for x86_64, but I don't see EVE binaries for that either --- Gentoo/FreeBSD/Linux developer
Bish Ounen Gallente Omni-Core Freedom Fighters Combined Planetary Union	Posted - 2007.08.14 16:00:00 - [40] Originally by: UberL0rd Originally by: Solbright Originally by: UberL0rd If it's native then it stands a reasonable change of running on non x86 based hardware ... Good try but no. Source level compatibility is all about removing native requirements, not enforcing them. Maybe you misunderstood. EVE Native Windows client (what we have now) requires Windows. EVE on Linux is made for Windows. Windows requries x86 , so EVE On Linux requires x86. [1] This is where we are now, even with the CCP announcement. EVE Native Linux client requires Linux EVE on Linux is made for Linux. Linux requires x86, x86_64, alpha, mips, sparc, powerpc, superh, m68k, s390 - and a few others I've no doubt missed. So with a native EVE Linux client, CCP could in theory release binaries for the above platforms running Linux. Of course, it's not that simple as you have endian issues, signed issues, etc. This is not helped that the simple fact that as Windows is x86 only [1] it's probably developed with the endianess and signedness of x86. So taking all that into consideration, how am I enforcing native requirements beyond what there already are? [1] Of course you can get 64-bit Windows for x86_64, but I don't see EVE binaries for that either Frankly, I'd be happy seeing CCP do a limited release tarball for the core developers of various platforms, and then let the core devs roll the binary for release for their platform. Of course, they could also just put a tarball out there and let us roll it ourselves, but I think for many linux newbies that would be a tad too difficult.
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.15 12:27:00 - [41] Originally by: UberL0rd Linux requires x86, x86_64, alpha, mips, sparc, powerpc, superh, m68k, s390 - and a few others I've no doubt missed. You've just required a non-native method! Only the finished binaries are the native code.
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.15 13:21:00 - [42] Just to be clear. Converting to source level compatibility means that the development is no longer native to any particular OS. And there is still no porting involved. Then what happens is, cross-platform APIs get used. Oh, gee another layer is back ... :P But we'd all be happy because no one OS is favored. :)
UberL0rd Minmatar Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.08.15 13:33:00 - [43] Originally by: Solbright Originally by: UberL0rd Linux requires x86, x86_64, alpha, mips, sparc, powerpc, superh, m68k, s390 - and a few others I've no doubt missed. You've just required a non-native method! Only the finished binaries are the native code. Errr dude, no one is talking about CCP releasing the source which I think is what you're saying. We're not asking for the source. I was just making the point that IF they make a native linux client and release this binary then they COULD do the same for other architectures and OS's - like i386 FreeBSD, Sparc64 NetBSD, etc. --- Gentoo/FreeBSD/Linux developer

CCP Lingorm	Posted - 2007.08.15 13:57:00 - [44] Some of the idea's in this thread are great ideas but hit some reality blocks. We would love to have EVE on as many platforms as possible, but there is one thing that we must must must have and that is accountability. If we start releasing any sort of open platform to build against for EVE then it adds another level of potential failure that we can not account for. Would you as a paying customer like being told that you need to talk to 'xyz' development group for support issues? We are being as restrictive as we are only to make sure that we can provide 1 point of service for our customers. I know this means that we do not get onto all the platforms possible and that some people get left out, but there is nothing practical we can do about that and still provide the level of service required of us as an On-line roleplaying game. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader

UberL0rd Minmatar Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.08.15 14:09:00 - [45] Originally by: CCP Lingorm We would love to have EVE on as many platforms as possible, but there is one thing that we must must must have and that is accountability. If we start releasing any sort of open platform to build against for EVE then it adds another level of potential failure that we can not account for. Would you as a paying customer like being told that you need to talk to 'xyz' development group for support issues? By releasing any kind of Linux client you have already done that. Or are you saying "Here's a Linux client! But hey, no support." As a paying customer I would like CCP to fix bugs with EVE. Or are you also saying you can fix Windows bugs that affect EVE too? As I have a whole can of worms playing EVE in Windows on my machine at work which I know for sure are not bugs with EVE as they are reproducable in other applications. But strangely the same hardware running Linux plays EVE just fine. --- Gentoo/FreeBSD/Linux developer
Solbright Advanced Security And Asset Protection	Posted - 2007.08.15 14:25:00 - [46] Originally by: UberL0rd I was just making the point that IF they make a native linux client and release this binary then they COULD do the same for other architectures and OS's - like i386 FreeBSD, Sparc64 NetBSD, etc. You are asking CCP to adopt source level compatibility. That's what I'm saying.

CCP Lingorm	Posted - 2007.08.15 15:38:00 - [47] Originally by: UberL0rd Originally by: CCP Lingorm We would love to have EVE on as many platforms as possible, but there is one thing that we must must must have and that is accountability. If we start releasing any sort of open platform to build against for EVE then it adds another level of potential failure that we can not account for. Would you as a paying customer like being told that you need to talk to 'xyz' development group for support issues? By releasing any kind of Linux client you have already done that. Or are you saying "Here's a Linux client! But hey, no support." As a paying customer I would like CCP to fix bugs with EVE. Or are you also saying you can fix Windows bugs that affect EVE too? As I have a whole can of worms playing EVE in Windows on my machine at work which I know for sure are not bugs with EVE as they are reproducable in other applications. But strangely the same hardware running Linux plays EVE just fine. Interesting twist. No we do not fix Windows error's lol You pay to play EVE and you pay for the support that goes with it. So we can only release what we can actively support. CCP Lingorm CCP Quality Assurance QA Engineering Team Leader

UberL0rd Minmatar Brotherhood of Polar Equation Mordus Angels	Posted - 2007.08.15 16:28:00 - [48] Originally by: CCP Lingorm Interesting twist. No we do not fix Windows error's lol You pay to play EVE and you pay for the support that goes with it. So we can only release what we can actively support. Great! As a paying EVE customer I make no distinction between a native Linux client and a native Windows client with a special wrapper that runs on Linux. And as a provider of said game, you should not either. Having a native linux client is no different from having a DirectX9 and DirectX10 clients - they're seperate entities as dev blogs have indicated. We're not asking for any open platform to build eve against, no. Let's not be that silly But what we'll probably ask for later, after inital Linux support, is a native client that uses OpenGL. But we both know that won't happen as you've invested too much in Microsoft only technologies . And WINE is x86 only Note to any would be software makers - Microsoft technologies are not the only option anymore. I game on Linux yesterday. Tomorrow I want to play my games on FreeBSD, maybe next year on QNX. Who knows what the underlying CPU will be? So here's some massive hints. 1) Use OpenGL - it's an open spec so it's cross platform (also works on Windows) 2) Use OpenAL - it's an open spec so it's cross platform (also works on Windows) 3) SDL is the nearest thing we have for cross platform network/mouse/keyword, but compared to the above two items are trivial in comparison. Or if you insist, then abstract the graphics and sound engines like in UnrealTournament where you can swap between DirectX and OpenGL on Windows. Lemmie see where Linux also runs? Oh yeah, PS/3 and Xbox. EVE on those platforms? Meh, that's enough for now :) I'll get off my soapbox. --- Gentoo/FreeBSD/Linux developer
Patch86 Di-Tron Heavy Industries Atlas Alliance	Posted - 2007.08.15 17:15:00 - [49] Originally by: CCP Lingorm If we start releasing any sort of open platform to build against for EVE then it adds another level of potential failure that we can not account for. Would you as a paying customer like being told that you need to talk to 'xyz' development group for support issues? OK then: will you be providing technical support for those aspects of the wrapped client that are part of TransGaming's software? Or will it be the responsibility of the TransGaming devs to fix the Cedega / Cider bugs? Because if thats the case, then you've already done just that. And I'll be honest with you- as a paying customer, I'd prefer have access to EVE on my platform of choice bundled with the necessity of less convenient support basis than not have access to EVE on my platform of choice at all. Simply: I'd prefer buggy EVE than no EVE. --------
Kadesh Priestess	Posted - 2007.08.15 20:52:00 - [50] Originally by: Patch86 Originally by: CCP Lingorm Simply: I'd prefer buggy EVE than no EVE. We were doing it for loong time (so no need imo to point at this fact). Only recent wine solutions are really doing their job well with eve :) ------------- Alternative idea to NOS
ElChupacabra	Posted - 2007.08.16 08:23:00 - [51] Originally by: Simon Monkoto I used EVE under Cedega in Ubuntu for quite some but eventually I had to leave it for the time being. Nothing to do with performance or anything, it worked quite well. The problem for me is that my alliance uses ventrilo which does not have a native Linux client. I can get it working fine under Wine but once its windows loses focus I can no longer use the push to talk key. Off topic I know but its really the only thing keeping me from playing EVE under Linux. When I was still playing this used to do the trick. Install/Usage docs are in the tarball (README).

Pages: 1 [2] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.