ZDoom

[Post a new comment]
Comments

	non GPL posted by Anonymous @ 64.61.221.132 on Feb 22 2008 3:34 AM
You people do realize that linking to FMOD violates the GPL, right? And that the original doom source is licensed under the GPL, right? And that technically ZDoom is breaking some laws here, right?
[Reply]
Re: non GPL posted by Anonymous @ 75.72.46.219 on Feb 22 2008 5:18 AM   ZDoom is not GPL. It is under the original doom license, which was your standard free for non-commercial use license (and does not even require the release of the source code). It was not relicensed to GPL (as most other active projects were) because ZDoom uses source from a variety of non-GPL projects. The use of fmod barely factors in, actually. John Carmack eventually re-released Doom under the GPL a few years after its initial release. The Doom community requested this after the first GL port of Doom had its source lost and the first CS port was withholding their source code.   [Reply]   Re: non GPL posted by Angelox @ 72.10.75.150 on Feb 22 2008 11:21 AM ZDoom is the best!   [Reply]   Re: non GPL posted by Anonymous @ 199.17.232.13 on Feb 22 2008 4:16 PM   "the use of FMOD barely factors in"... Yeah, sound isn't so important...   [Reply]   Re: non GPL posted by entro-p @ 196.25.255.214 on Aug 29 2009 6:19 PM Honestly, who cares   [Reply]   Re: non GPL posted by Ferk @ 150.214.118.96 on Nov 10 2009 1:24 PM   Here's a post in the ZDoom forums about porting ZDoom to OpenAl: http://forum.zdoom.org/viewtopic.php?f=34&t=19030   [Reply]

	GZDoom posted by stevenaaus @ 210.49.69.237 on Sep 28 2007 12:35 PM
GL Zdoom ( http://grafzahl.drdteam.org/ ) is getting ported. Hopefully it'll be makeable out of the box in future releases, but at the moment this is where you can look around for GZDoom patches. It's still not an easy build, and you'll need: 7zip, flac, fmod. http://forum.drdteam.org/viewtopic.php?t=2494&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=60&sid=1654e2b8dff55d69c22a9349b468ab57
[Reply]
Re: GZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 75.72.46.219 on Feb 28 2008 6:11 AM   The 1.1.0 release of GZDoom indeed compiles without modification. Generally, so does the code in SVN, though it breaks from time to time, since the developer doesn't actually use Linux at all or even compile with MinGW.   [Reply]

	Zdoom binary posted by stevenaaus @ 210.49.148.187 on Mar 31 2007 1:05 AM
I've cooked a zdoom binary with some libraries, and it seems to go ok. http://www.linuxquake.org/index3.html
[Reply]

	ZDoom posted by bakaotaku85 @ 138.78.141.50 on Sep 12 2006 5:03 AM
I run ZDoom on my Windows box, but I must say I am dissapointed with the source version of this. Would it kill them to release a config file with the code, or mabye even some documentation of the packages a build requires?
[Reply]
Re: ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 124.168.72.82 on Nov 19 2006 3:24 PM   I didnt know windows people even looked at code! Wacky!   [Reply]

	what? posted by Anonymous @ 201.255.71.246 on Sep 8 2006 9:14 AM
This game shouldn't be listed here. Linux support is almost NON EXISTENT.
[Reply]
Re: what? posted by jammet @ 212.202.176.150 on Sep 8 2006 2:12 PM   I second that.   [Reply]   Re: what? posted by Anonymous @ 64.61.211.134 on Sep 8 2006 5:10 PM   Well, the support directly from the two main developers isn't so great, but they happily accept patches for Linux and try to keep the existing support working as best they can from Windows. Since it is now developed in the open on a subversion server, any issues are usually discovered and fixed without days of their appearance on the subversion server. However, it is indeed very difficult to build on 64-bit platforms, like a lot of other 32-bit legacy code. (You currently have to build it as 32-bit, even though it would probably be not that difficult to make it 64-bit clean). Finally, the main developers provide no direct support, so there are no Linux binaries released, for example.   [Reply]

	License posted by Anonymous @ 69.161.19.166 on Jul 9 2006 10:45 PM
"ZDoom may be used and distributed free of charge. No profit may be made from the sale of it." Oh I'm sorry, but I was under the impression the Doom sources (C) iD Software were released under the GPL. Such restriction may not be made upon GPL software, and you require a license change to the code by means of permission from the author (iD Software) to do so ; which quite frankly I do not believe you have received. ?
[Reply]
Re: License posted by Anonymous @ 67.51.116.126 on Jul 10 2006 12:58 PM   Oh, snap!   [Reply]   Re: License posted by Anonymous @ 64.61.211.164 on Jul 13 2006 11:31 PM   The Doom sources were first released under a different license that prohibits commercial usage. Later, after GLDoom (the first GL accelerated port) had its sources lost and discontinued the project, the Doom community asked that the Doom sources be re-released under the GPL. Everyone using the source code was encouraged to change their license to GPL, but they could not be required to. ZDoom's author opted to keep it licensed as it is because it uses code from the Build engine, which uses a very similar non-commercial use license. Ken Silverman (author of Build) has not granted requests to re-license Build as GPL. In addition, ZDoom also uses some source code from Hexen (and maybe Heretic, too), which has a ludicrous license that seems to permit doing nothing with the source. Raven, which owns the rights to Hexen, does not even bother to respond to requests to relicense their code either, even though they eventually would release Hexen II under GPL.   [Reply]   Re: License posted by Ferk @ 212.225.134.60 on Aug 29 2009 12:20 PM   Hexen is now GPL   [Reply]

	ZDoom posted by jammet @ 212.202.25.192 on Jul 6 2006 1:19 PM
Okay, this game might be open source and all, but Randy Heit's never ever been serious about the Linux port whatsoever. It's always been lacking, slacking, or non-existant. I guess there is some marginal merit for this game being on happy penguin, but.... GOOD LUCK trying to compile this. I think Randy should either get his act together or find someone else to maintain the Linux port for him. Sorry for being blunt, but the promise has been there for several years now. It's like "the Duke Nukem Forever of all Linux Doom Ports" and should win an Award for that. Vapor-Open-Source.
[Reply]
Re: ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 62.254.128.7 on Jul 7 2006 6:04 AM   I agree, and putting the sources in 7z format, while a command line tool is available for linux, makes life somewhat more difficult as well. How easily does GZdoom compile on linux?   [Reply]   Re: ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 193.151.26.23 on Jul 7 2006 2:05 PM   Easy as pie... just rewrite the whole OpenGL code in it.   [Reply]   Re: ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 66.36.135.13 on Sep 8 2006 6:42 AM   Randy stopped caring about Linux a few years ago. Nowadays the Linux side of ZDoom is basically just people desperately trying to keep the Linux port functional by giving him patches, which he accepts and includes in his source tree, but he doesn't even care if it compiles or not when he does a release. Very deceiving. IMHO Linux sites shouldn't list ZDoom. If you want a good Doom engine port under Linux, the only two good choices are PRBoom and Doomsday. Everything else is botched-up crap.   [Reply]

	Windows 2000 network support wanted posted by Anonymous @ 66.68.170.133 on Feb 14 2002 5:17 PM
I could not run it in multiplayer network mode at all. It crashes with a network error. Also I had problems after reaching level 8 or 9 - the one with spiders in a room on the side and a lot of monsters around them. You cannot save game at the end of this level. Besides that everything else was fantastic. I hope network support could be added for Windows 2000
[Reply]

	ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 63.163.134.175 on Jan 27 2002 12:09 PM
This is the best game ever created, anyone who hasn't tried it as of the year 2002, you're missing out!
[Reply]

	ZDoom posted by Anonymous @ 200.171.6.8 on Dec 28 2001 10:57 PM
This is great! Much better than the original Doom (while maintaining the same look) and very easy network play.
[Reply]