xadmaster devkit creation question

[hceline]

I finally got xadmaster v13 to compile on native 68k with free choice of what clients to be internal/external. Just fresh out of the linker, and did not fail on extracting a dir of 13 test-archives of different formats. Going to run some more tests. And clean up the sources a bit, so the next person doesn't have to use days figuring out how to compile. Then I gonna try to package it relatively nicely, and upload on Aminet.

But I need someone to enlighten me a little bit if I'm gonna get that far.
In the process of getting everything to compile with select-able external/internal clients I updated the libraries/xadmaster.h in the devkit from the one generated from includes/xadmaster.h.in in the main source-directory.
Links to the devkit libraries/xadmaster.h from where I downloaded the source: https://github.com/ashang/libxad/blo...es/xadmaster.h
The one generated from includes/xadmaster.h.in is attached to this post.

After I've done that and made them practically identical, I begun doubting myself.
The files contain a long list of tag-function call flags. But they looked different originally.
the one generated form includes/xadmaster.h.in said:

#define XAD_EXTENSION           (TAG_PTR+202) 
#define XAD_SETINPOS            (TAG_SIZ+240)
#define XAD_INSERTDIRSFIRST     (TAG_INT+241)

While the one from devkit directory said:
#define XAD_EXTENSION           (TAG_USER+202)
#define XAD_SETINPOS            (TAG_USER+240)
#define XAD_INSERTDIRSFIRST     (TAG_USER+241)

(comments and empty lines stripped out)

I copied the whole list over the one in devkit, so the lists became identical.
Later I noticed this in same files:

/* on the Amiga, pointer size == int size == 32 bits */
#define TAG_PTR TAG_USER
#define TAG_INT TAG_USER

Now, I'm really wondering; Should I have kept the tag-function call lists different in devkit form the version internal to main source-tree for some reason?

Thank you for your time.
HC

[hexaae]

Great news!
Keep up the good work!

[hceline]

I did it all wrong, got it confirmed from one of the original authors.

The easiest way to fix my mess is to start over. I will try again when I've finished building a desktop replacement for my laptop Win10 PC.
And since I apparently don't know what I am doing, I'll refrain from uploading it to Aminet when I get it compiling again. I'll just put it up as an fork of the sf.net import already on GitHub.

[hexaae]

Ok... let us know...
OS3.x badly needs an up-to-date xadmaster (for example for many LHA archives incompatible with old format supported by current 68k xadmaster).

Examples of problematic LHAs (for testing) giving errors decompressing through XAD (I use http://m68k.aminet.net/search?query=voodoo-x ):
http://m68k.aminet.net/package/dev/mui/MCC_NList-0.128

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Actually, I don't see any error on Xad's part inLO unpacking the "MCC_NList-0.128.lha" archive, it basically just adds additional unnamed files from zero k.

"MCC_NList-0.128.lha" was compressed with a particular version of LHA (LHD is the acronym)

---- Italiano ---

In realtà non vedo nessun errore da parte di Xad nello scompattare l'archivio "MCC_NList-0.128.lha", praticamente aggiunge solo dei file aggiuntivi senza nome da zero k.


"MCC_NList-0.128.lha" è stato compresso con una particolare versione di LHA (LHD è l'acronimo)

[hexaae]

It's a problem with every new LHA compressed files, there are a few on Aminet giving errors on WB3.1 68K with current old XAD when decompressing... From missing dir to overwriting errors...
This never happens uncompressing the same archive with latest Lha from Aminet from shell.

New XAD 13.x includes a newer external LHA (un)archiver data file wich works fine instead, just like latest LHA.

[hceline]

I got tired of waiting for the parts for my new Win10 PC, so I got the files transferred my Win7 PC and got my mess cleaned up. Since I changed to much last time, I decided to ignore all compiler warnings*. And just fix the errors that stopped the compile.
I got it to compile, tested with a total of _one_ lha-archive, and put it on GitHub.
Feel free to test it, I take no responsibility for what it might do.
Link: https://github.com/Hagbard-Celin/xadmaster_Amiga_68k

*see my next post.

[James]

Originally Posted by hceline

Feel free to test it, I take no responsibility for what it might do.
Link: https://github.com/Hagbard-Celin/xadmaster_Amiga_68k

Nice!
Testing 040 version - all good so far.

[hceline]

Good.

Also realized that when I wrote that I ignored compiler warnings, I forgot about fixing the fallout from fixing one "struct Library"/"struct UtilityBase". I had fix the source of the flood of warnings that change made, else I would have gone mad.

[AMIGASYSTEM]

Thanks hceline, will there be a version for AROS x86 in the future as well?

[hceline]

I'm just on a personal quest to (re)learn Amiga programming.
My changes where to make it compile with sas/c on m68k, and would be of no use for a Aros version.
For Aros I guess it would be better to use the SourceForge-import repository I cloned without my changes, or the sources for the AmigaOS 4 version if you can find them.

Edit: also an Aros version is mentioned in this thread: https://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=99207

[vulture]

@hceline

Thx a lot for this!
How exactly do I dl the binaries? For some reason, I can only see the available sources.
Thx!

[hceline]

If you click the heading that says "Releases" over the link with the label-icon that says "1 tags", you will find a lha archive when you press the arrow in front of "Assets" at the bottom.

[vulture]

Oh yes! Thanks!

[hexaae]

Seem to be working great! Testing also against WinUAEEnforcer and I see no hits opening different archive formats, and new LHA ones (like the above mentioned MCC_NList from Aminet) with good old Vodoo-X 1.5, finally!
Will continue testing...

[itsmedoofer]

Just installed on a OS3.2.1 vanilla A1200 with 8Mb, giving it a test run with VirusZ and all seems good so far, thanks for your efforts, appreciated. When I get the A1200 Blizzard 060 out I'll give it a spin with that

[EctoOne]

I was using this new version over the past few days while setting up a fresh installation. I'm mainly using it in combination with Directory Opus and haven't encountered any issues yet.

So, thanks for this from me as well.