On Tue, 03 Jul 2012 06:24:47 +0200 Christian Mauduit <uf...@ufoot.org> wrote: > Hi Johan, > > I agree ;) > > FYI, at this stage, I've already filed liquidwar6 as a "Requested > package" in wnpp (virtual Debian package) and as a side note, it's > available in playdeb. > > http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/requested > http://www.playdeb.net/software/Liquid%20War%206 > > I hope some Debian maintainer will find time and interest to package it > some day, but for now, I can't help more I guess. I can provide upstream > help and make it easier to package if needed, but packaging for real is > beyond my knowledge and rights. > > Finally, there's an ever-upcoming 5.6.5 Liquid War (v5 this time) > release which fixes a few minor issues and actually states the package > is deprecated. Release of this one is planned whenever LW6 reaches the > point where it's network playable (even in an alpha, experimental state).
Hi Christian, I had a look at liquidwar6 and I'm attaching the debian directory to this bug report with my preliminary work. At first I was interested in replacing the current v5 version with liquidwar6 because it looks better in many respects, although network mode still seems to be in an experimental state. Unfortunately the game requires a lot of cpu time and when I play a "Quick game", the cpu is always at 100%. That's a real show-stopper at the moment. The standalone liquidwar-server package would be obsolete with v6. If I understand correctly, the main executable provides this feature now. My debian directory includes three patches: The debian.patch removes all Makefile code that requires your debian *.in files. It is usually better to remove the debian directory from the upstream tarball because it is replaced by the official debian directory later. format-security.patch: Liquidwar6 fails to build from source in Debian because we use the format-security build flag now. no-Werror.patch: Werror is great for development but a little bit of a nightmare for package maintainers because every future warning will cause a build failure. :) (wishlist): It would be great if Liquidwar6 could use SDL2 in the future. I think I would continue my work on upgrading the liquidwar package in Debian if we could resolve the cpu issue somehow but until then it is probably better to stick with the more stable liquidwar5 series. Regards, Markus
liquidwar6_debian.tar.gz
Description: application/gzip
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
