misc.c:2175: warning: implicit declaration of function `cyber_bit_name'
misc.c:2175: warning: format argument is not a pointer (arg 3)
misc.c:2233: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
misc.c:2252: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
misc.c:2270: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
misc.c:2288: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
misc.c:2306: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
misc.c:2324: error: request for member `bits' in something not a structure or union
make[1]: *** [o/misc.o] Error 1
make: *** [all] Error 2
These are the last of a few issues i'm having with implementing this snippet into my code....it's kinda a pain and i'm not sure what i'm missing ...
You'll have to be a bit more specific about just what it is you're doing, what you have done and where you have done it. Also giving some more specific code context would be helpful. :)
heh i've seemed to have some good luck lately as i've been able to just hack my way to the end of the tunnel both times hopefully when i'm done i'll have something to provide people.
-Mirrodan
oh ya if someone needs a copy of sampson smaug14afuss with (bug free) copyover and the damn imc ripped out let me know.
You should be wary of hacks especially as a novice programmer, because you may have created a syntactically correct solution that is programmatically incorrect. In other words just because it compiles doesn't mean it works, and if you're just hacking at the code you should be very wary of having accidentally added "features" to your code.
hey yea i figured out the bit vector stuff not totally but for what i've been doing it's working out great. I just want to say thank you Ksilyan for your help and direction. Come check me out at dreamsphere.org port 4000. I'm still way in the beta stages of things but, I'm always up for a good chat about this or that.
Heh. That "damn" imc as you put it isn't buggy. If you were watching the log messages it was simply telling you, rightly so, that the config file included in the current archive here is biffed. It's easily corrected. It's also an easily disabled feature for anyone who doesn't want it - just comment it out in the Makefile and no more worries.
As far as copyover not having been added, that was a deliberate concious decision on my part to leave it out since the goal of FUSS was to bring it up to bug-free stock status. Intermud support was stock, so IMC2 and I3 were included.
( as a side note, the stock intermud code was really buggy, but I digress )
Copyover not being stock, it wasn't felt as necessary to include.
Hey Samson sorry didn't mean to sound...i don't know rude...inconsiderate etc. I'm a newb at all of this and I'm kinda hacking my way through it all so just about anything seems buggy to me. But i wasn't reffering to IMC being buggy it was the copyover snippet that was added. It was buggy off the bat now it could of very well been my doing. I didn't mean any offense by it.
Actually the hotboot code on my site is not "buggy off the bat" and I've had very few people mention anything at all having gone wrong with it. Generally what few posts I have seen or what few emails I get about it have indicated one or more steps not being followed completely.
Still, due to popular demand, the hotboot code is now part of FUSS, so there should be no more worries about people installing it wrong in the future. I have not done this with the two SWR variants though, mainly because I am not sure what other things would be useful. Though I'm sure Greven can weigh in on this, and if he doesn't mind, then perhaps his SWR hotboot can find its way into the SWR 1.0 FUSS code.
Samson,
Again like i said i'm a newbie and again I'm sorry didn't mean to sound...i don't know ungreatfiul or mean in any way i more then likey just didn't follow a few steps. You're a greate coder and I don't want to sound in anyway like i was talking trash on you or your code.