Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Comments, problems, suggestions about Oric emulators (Euphoric, Mess, Amoric, etc...) it's the right place to ask. And don't hesitate to give your tips and tricks that help using these emulations in the best possible way on your favorite operating system.
User avatar
iss
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 5:43 pm
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by iss » Wed Apr 29, 2015 2:17 pm

I can't reproduce message box to appear in last Oricutron (ver.: WIP-661, Linux-64, Atmos mode).
Attached are two programs and the data file.
store-recall-test.zip
(731 Bytes) Downloaded 151 times

User avatar
Chema
Game master
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:55 am
Location: Gijón, SPAIN
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Chema » Wed Apr 29, 2015 3:13 pm

Yeah, I forgot to add I'm using 1.2 windows version.

(Though I should turn on my laptop to make sure)

User avatar
Symoon
Archivist
Posts: 1051
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2006 12:44 am
Location: Paris, France
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Symoon » Wed Apr 29, 2015 6:14 pm

No problem here restoring the file with win XP 32 and Euphoric 1.019 (using ISS's files)

User avatar
Chema
Game master
Posts: 1919
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 10:55 am
Location: Gijón, SPAIN
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Chema » Fri May 01, 2015 12:55 pm

Well, I am running Oricutron 1.2 win32 under Windows 8.1 64 bit version. The tap file generated with the above example reports the end address as ffff, which I think is what upsets Oricutron. I include the tap file. You can use the second example to RECALL it.


MATRIZ.tap
(145 Bytes) Downloaded 149 times
The file provided by iss is different than mine, though still produces the same error for me.

Here is what I get:
Sin título.png

User avatar
Hialmar
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Toulouse, France
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Hialmar » Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:09 am

Google code is turning read only on the 25th of August.

So what do we do ?

Move to github ? Ask Dbug to add us to his SVN ?
Hialmar
CEO and Silicium member.

User avatar
Dbug
Site Admin
Posts: 2299
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Dbug » Tue Aug 11, 2015 10:11 am

Hialmar wrote:Google code is turning read only on the 25th of August.

So what do we do ?

Move to github ? Ask Dbug to add us to his SVN ?
I don't have any problem with adding it to SVN, but that would probably be detrimental to the code quality as there is no support for bug tracking or stuff like that.
For a large project maintained by more than one person there are probably better solutions :)

Ideally you want to find a solution that keeps the entire commit and branch history of the project.

User avatar
ibisum
Squad Leader
Posts: 834
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:56 am

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by ibisum » Tue Aug 11, 2015 11:24 am

I'd vote to turn the existing repo into a Git-compatible repo, and host it on GitLab, not GitHub, since it provides a more flexible solution ..

User avatar
Hialmar
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 318
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:25 am
Location: Toulouse, France
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Hialmar » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:22 pm

I don't know Gitlab but the advantage of Github is that it has an all in one tool that makes svn to git transition easier. It has a synchronize button that does the commit/push transparently, you can easily see diffs and create branches.
Hialmar
CEO and Silicium member.

User avatar
ibisum
Squad Leader
Posts: 834
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:56 am

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by ibisum » Wed Aug 12, 2015 5:55 pm

Gitlab has all the above, and it also can be converted to a private local repo at ease (run Gitlab locally) if its needed ..

Also, GitLab has a less-restrictive free-use account level, while GitHub is a tad more intrusive. Its easier, for example, and cheaper, to have free private repo's on GitLab, not that its relevant to us .. but also, GitHub is becoming a bit of a hegemony. There isn't anything it offers that GitLab doesn't.

User avatar
Dbug
Site Admin
Posts: 2299
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2006 10:00 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Dbug » Wed Aug 12, 2015 8:21 pm

I'm going to be very pragmatic on that one: I guess the only persons who really should decide ultimately are the ones that have regularly committed to the current codebase of Oricutron :)
After all, they are the ones who are going to live with the choice.

User avatar
Xeron
Emulation expert
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Xeron » Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:00 pm

I didn't want to move it to github, because although I love git, there was no good Amiga git client.

Now we have simplegit, I no longer have a problem with using github, so I plan to migrate it there, unless anyone has any serious objections?

User avatar
Xeron
Emulation expert
Posts: 382
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2009 5:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by Xeron » Wed Aug 12, 2015 11:02 pm

Ibisum wrote:Gitlab has all the above, and it also can be converted to a private local repo at ease (run Gitlab locally) if its needed ..

Also, GitLab has a less-restrictive free-use account level, while GitHub is a tad more intrusive. Its easier, for example, and cheaper, to have free private repo's on GitLab, not that its relevant to us .. but also, GitHub is becoming a bit of a hegemony. There isn't anything it offers that GitLab doesn't.
.. and why would you need private repos anyway? Oricutron is a public project, and git is a distributed vcs, so your local clone is its own private repo.

You could even maintain your own clone on gitlab.

User avatar
ibisum
Squad Leader
Posts: 834
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:56 am

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by ibisum » Thu Aug 13, 2015 10:25 am

I just think Gitlab has a better set of features, which we'll use in the long run. Well they explain the differences better than I can, anyway: https://about.gitlab.com/better-than-github/

User avatar
iss
Flight Lieutenant
Posts: 439
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 5:43 pm
Location: Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by iss » Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:46 pm

Definitely I'll miss one simple thing: human readable SVN revision number (it's used in WIP builds by Makefile).
I know, there are some solutions for this issue, but no universal one that will satisfy everyone.

User avatar
polluks
Officer Cadet
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2012 10:09 pm
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Oricutron 1.0 (EDIT: Now 1.2)

Post by polluks » Fri Aug 28, 2015 1:19 pm

Hi!
Right now Google Code is read only but
https://sourceforge.net/projects/oricutron/
is waiting for Xeron and friends...
cc65 development
Oric Atmos + Cumulus
Acorn Electron

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest