[FF7] command line tools for LGP archives - LGP/UnLGP (v.5)

[arew264]

That wasn't verbal abuse, that was simple statement of fact. Other programmers will say the same thing. I have respect for Microsoft, if only because Windows, as much as some people dislike it, is an excellent operating system with an uncompromising approach to usability. I love Linux, but it isn't for everyone. Windows has achieved that.

The question was raised as to why this tool hasn't been developed for Windows, and I was corroborating previous statements that development is easier on Linux. It is; that's the simple fact. If you think stating that is verbal abuse, then you're going to be offended for most of your life. I may have been harsher than I intended when I mentioned the SDK, but it's entirely true. To develop a Linux application, you download a few megabytes of development libraries and compilers. To develop on Windows, you download a DVD image (if I remember correctly, it was a full size DVD image) and use it to install the Windows SDK. This is a significant hinderance to development.
The other thing I left unsaid is that I find if easier to use the GCC MinGW compiler (basically GCC ported to Windows) to develop Windows applications than it is to develop them using Microsoft's tools when you plan to use good ole C rather than Microsoft Visual Basic or C#.

Now, if this is straight up C, I could look into porting it to Windows and possibly posting binaries if that would be useful.

EDIT: Also...

If you have any question, suggestion or commentary about anything related to it, you are more than welcome to post. But anything else, especially verbal abuse, fancruft propaganda and the troubles of using pirated copies of software, is unwelcome.

I could almost accuse you of verbal abuse for accusing me of being a verbal abuser, a propagandist, and a pirate in the same statement. I made it quite clear that DEVELOPMENT is easier on Linux. I never recommended it; I never said it was superior to Windows in any other way.
In fact, my first statement was a recommendation for an alternative development environment for Windows.

 

[obesebear]

I don't think there is any doubt that you didn't verbally abuse anything. 

@FleetCommand, are there really forum rules against verbally abusing Microsoft or Unix?  I honestly never read the rules    I just lurked 6 months before posting.

Back to on topic, arew264, you said you think you could make a binary of this?

 

[Kranmer]

i have just built this and it works great (on XP SP3 anyway), i dont seem to be getting any errors in the app.log now looking for files that are there in flevel.lgp, thanks alot for this Aali it will be especially usefull now palmer is at the import+export stage.

EDIT:-

LGP 0.3b binaries compiled by me can be gotten here
http://www.mediafire.com/?iyvidgtm3y2

 

[m35]

Also just built these with MinGW on WinXP SP3 without errors. Didn't even need MSYS. Executed both lgp.exe and unlgp.exe without any arguments and they also ran without errors.

Code: [Select]

C:\lgp\makecc -Wall  lgp.c -o lgpcc -Wall  unlgp.c -o unlgpC:\lgp\lgpUsage: lgp <directory> <archive>C:\lgp\unlgpUsage: unlgp <archive>

Uploaded the 0.2b binaries here. They will be available as long as Google Page Creator is still available (it was supposed to shut down last month).

I also want to ensure no one is of the the misconception that VS Express, or any Windows dev environments, can be used without cost. They are dependent on other software that has a price tag of at least $100USD.

Edit:Oops, I am incorrect. My binary needed cygwin.dll. kranmer binary doesn't, which is much nicer.

 

[Aali]

You should probably bundle the required .dlls as well.
I don't think people with cygwin already installed are going to need those binaries

 

[Kranmer]

here is my binary that doesnt require the cygwin DLL (proberly because i didnt use cygwin i used MinGW)
http://www.mediafire.com/?mmdmjzfyatz

 

[m35]

You should probably bundle the required .dlls as well.
I don't think people with cygwin already installed are going to need those binaries

Didn't think I needed to clarify, but like kranmer, I also didn't need cygwin to build the binaries (just used MinGW and make for MinGW).

Both kranmer and my binaries don't have any dependencies except MS Windows (and perhaps msvcrt*.dll, but most people should have that installed already).

Edit: Oops, I am incorrect. My binaries do need cygwin.dll. Pay no attention to this post.

 

[arew264]

I guess I don't need to worry about making a binary then.
MinGW is a much better solution to compiling applications on Windows than Cygwin.

 

[Aali]

Didn't think I needed to clarify, but like kranmer, I also didn't need cygwin to build the binaries (just used MinGW and make for MinGW).

Both kranmer and my binaries don't have any dependencies except MS Windows (and perhaps msvcrt*.dll, but most people should have that installed already).

You didn't need to clarify, your binary needs cygwin1.dll, kranmers doesn't.

 

[Fleet Command]

Successfully compiled it under Microsoft C# Express! Compiled it under C++ but resulted in DEP errors so I skipped it. However, C# did the charm.

@Aali: Permission to build a Windows GUI version?

 

[obesebear]

Successfully compiled it under Microsoft C# Express! Compiled it under C++ but resulted in DEP errors so I skipped it. However, C# did the charm.

@Aali: Permission to build a Windows GUI version?

If the source is made available, it's usually ok to do with it whatever you like

 

[Fleet Command]

:lol: The source code will be included, if Aali gives permission, since it will be published under Attribution, Share-alike, No Derivative Work.

:lol: But what do you want the source code for, when I'm going to publish it under Attribution, Share Alike, No Derivative Work?

As a side note, consider reading https://www.ff7catalog.com/threads/5834/, subsection "Arrrr, matey! I downloaded FF7 and...".

 

[arew264]

No, he's saying that because Aali released his source, you're generally free to do what you want with it. Whether you need to release the source to anything you make depends on the license Aali is using.

Okay, why do you keep bringing up piracy? We're talking about LGP packing and unpacking utilities and nothing even related to piracy, so why are you posting this?

 

[Fleet Command]

No, he's saying that because Aali released his source, you're generally free to do what you want with it. Whether you need to release the source to anything you make depends on the license Aali is using.

Last time I checked, he said "if the source is made available" not "since/when the source is made available". So, he is talking about my source code.

Okay, why do you keep bringing up piracy? We're talking about LGP packing and unpacking utilities and nothing even related to piracy, so why are you posting this?

It was not to you! And it was not about piracy. Obesebear has already asked me to "chill out %50" and so I posted that link just for a funny mention of employing BY-SA-ND. It was certainly not about Microsoft, Piracy or WGA. So, stop attacking other people.

 

[Aali]

Well, this is the license; do whatever you want with it, unless I ask you to stop. Also give some credit.

 

[obesebear]

No, he's saying that because Aali released his source, you're generally free to do what you want with it. Whether you need to release the source to anything you make depends on the license Aali is using.

Last time I checked, he said "if the source is made available" not "since/when the source is made available". So, he is talking about my source code.

Actually I was talking about Aali's source code.  In hindsight, maybe I should have said since. 
The reason I said IF is because I was generalizing ANY source code made available.  Sorry about the misunderstanding

 

[Fleet Command]

Well, this is the license; do whatever you want with it, unless I ask you to stop. Also give some credit.

What? Propertiary Subsidiary license?  :-o

Well, I didn't expect it, celebrated one. Although, no hard feelings, you are the owner of your own work. Still, this type of license is so unprecendented amongst Linux applications...

So... there will be no Windows GUI version, then. But at least I still have my .NET console application binaries licensed under CC-BY-SA-ND. Besides, I think this licensing example serves as a great example of reality for likes of arew264.

Thanks anyway.

 

[obesebear]

He's saying it doesn't have a license.
All he wants from you is to give him credit

 

[arew264]

Why is everything such a big deal with you? He's not naming a specific license because there isn't one. If you can make it better, make it better. If you can make it more accessible, make it more accessible. If you want to add a GUI to make it more user friendly, I highly doubt Aali will raise any protest. He didn't post the source code so he could wave it in front of you, he posted it because others can build on his work.

And seriously, stop with the side remarks about Linux and me. Linux applications can be closed source as well, in fact, I run my main development desktop with closed source NVidia video drivers. That's reality. The open source ATI drivers for my laptop are way better than the closed source ones. That's reality as well.
I mentioned WGA because it's another level of irritation between me and getting work done, not because I endorse any form of piracy. I run legal copies of Windows, I just don't like to have to prove it every time.

 

[Fleet Command]

He's saying it doesn't have a license.
All he wants from you is to give him credit

No he is saying:

Well, this is the license; do whatever you want with it, unless I ask you to stop. Also give some credit.

• "Do whatever you want with it" means: That I, Fleet Command, am in complete control of the development.
• "Unless I ask you to stop" means: In the end, it is Aali who decides whether the product that I develop must be released or not, which in turn means that he, Aali, is in control of what is developed and what is not and I must seek to appease him. Otherwise it is: "STOP!"
• Finally, "Give some credit" solidifies all the above.

Come on man, take it easy. Aali did a good job and he feels protective about it, so much that does not think a less strict license like CC-BY-SA-ND (which also gives proper credit) is enough. I repeat, He has the right to. And well...  :| I have the right to not develop a Windows GUI version under these conditions.

Why is everything such a big deal with you? He's not naming a specific license because there isn't one. If you can make it better, make it better. I you can make it more accessible, make it more accessible. If you want to add a GUI to make it more user friendly, I highly doubt Aali will raise any protest. He didn't post the source code so he could wave it in front of you, he posted it because others can build on his work.

And seriously, stop with the side remarks about Linux and me. Linux applications can be closed source as well, in fact, I run my main development desktop with closed source NVidia video drivers. That's reality. The open source ATI drivers for my laptop are way better than the closed source ones. That's reality as well.
I mentioned WGA because it's another level of irritation between me and getting work done, not because I endorse any form of piracy. I run legal copies of Windows, I just don't like to have to prove it every time.

:-o I didn't mean any of what you said, because if I wanted to mean so, I'd have written it so. I meant exactly what I wrote: People, even celebrated people like Aali, feel protective of their own work and they have the right to. I did not meantion anything about WGA, Microsoft, Open-source, Piracy or anything else.

So, please stop acting offensive. Seriously, if you have a problem with Microsoft or WGA, keep them away from this forum.