Quoting: Guest

Quoting: ShmerlWhile it's annoying, I found one relatively simple workaround. Run such games with:

HOME=$HOME/.local/share

Then all that clutter will move to more appropriate location.

Hello, could I please ask how to implement that code? Is it in bashrc? Thank you.

No! Don't put this into .bashrc that will royally mess up your session. Put it into some script from which you can launch the game. In the script, add:

export HOME=$HOME/.local/share

Or if you want, add this to the .desktop launcher for it. I.e. let's say the game binary is /path/game_bin

So, the launcher would normally have something like:

Exec=/path/game_bin

And you can change it to (use full correct path, otherwise it won't work):

Exec=env HOME=/home/<your_user>/.local/share /path/game_biun

and etc.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: PhiladelphusSerious question, are there actually that many 64-bit executable games out there and is it actually beneficial?

I ask because the subject comes up regularly on the Paradox forum with people bemoaning the fact that the Clausewitz engine is 32-bit only and predicting massive performance improvements if it were only 64-bit, only for a developer to explain that making the engine 64-bit would change basically nothing about performance (other than allowing the use of more than 4GB of mods together, which is kind of a niche case) and that they have no plans to rewrite the engine.

There may very well be good reasons for making games 64-bit and I've love to hear them, it's just that I tend to see 64-bit thrown around as a bit of a buzz-word.

Paradox should unstick their head from the sand, and fix the engine. I suspect their general neglect to make their tools 64-bit compatible, forced Obsidian to release Tyranny in 32-bit only (because it used Paradox account integration libraries). It created the expected mess of lacking LFS and crashes on large XFS partitions. The bottom line - no excuses. 64-bit is a must today. (Luckily Obsidian finally released 64-bit version of Tyranny this June).

Some engines have a lot of work to make them 64-bit, and understandably it can take time. But not doing it at all with excuse that performance is OK as is, is just silly. Beamdog for the reference reworked their current generation of Inifinty engine to 64-bit.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Btw, I tried contacting CDPR to clarify their stance on this. I don't really expect them to comment, but who knows.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: camocelticPlease, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, listen to the man! My home folder is cluttered enough without Runescape, Project Zomboid, Eschalon, et cetera contributing to the problem.

While it's annoying, I found one relatively simple workaround. Run such games with:

HOME=$HOME/.local/share

Then all that clutter will move to more appropriate location.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: rkfgAt least it's backward compatible so there should be no downsides supplying your own version.

It's actually ABI forward compatible, not backward. See https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/libstdc++/manual/abi.html [External Link]

Versioning gives subsequent releases of library binaries the ability to add new symbols and add functionality, all the while retaining compatibility with the previous releases in the series. Thus, program binaries linked with the initial release of a library binary will still run correctly if the library binary is replaced by carefully-managed subsequent library binaries. This is called forward compatibility.

The reverse (backwards compatibility) is not true. It is not possible to take program binaries linked with the latest version of a library binary in a release series (with additional symbols added), substitute in the initial release of the library binary, and remain link compatible.

I.e. you can run code built against older libstdc++, dynamically linked with newer one, but you aren't guaranteed anything if you use code built against newer libstdc++, dynamically linked with older version.

And the later case happens, when for example some game bundles older version of libstdc++ and preloads the bundled lib, and then loads something like radeonsi_dri.so that expects newer libstdc++. Things go haywire.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: rkfgSTASIS is suffering from this right now. The engine needs newer libstdc++.so.6 than provided in SteamOS so it doesn't start there. So another advice: check your dependencies on older distros if possible and either ship the libs with the game or link them statically if you can.

libstdc++ is a mess. Even if you statically link it, you might still hit a snag. For instance Mesa is using system libstdc++ in libgl1-mesa-dri, and you can get a conflicting situation.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: morbiusPort didn't make money, that's the only real reason we didn't get Witcher 3.

Not according to CDPR. They listed TW2 on Linux as success in their shareholders report. You don't do that with something that was a money drain.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: slaapliedjewhen I was first trying it, worked perfect, second time around everyone was missing their lower portion of their bodies!

See https://appdb.winehq.org/objectManager.php?sClass=version&iId=26114#notes [External Link]

Quoting: slaapliedjeStill stuck on the first boss...

Do you mean the Beast [External Link]? It can be somewhat annoying indeed. Make sure you use Specter Oil.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: TheBardLook at what GOG does with Galaxy. It is still supposed to come to Linux "eventually" (see the FAQ), they even maked it "in progress". But 2 years after ... still nothing.

The Galaxy issue is actually more annoying than "there is no client, so I have to update games manually". It actually can prevent various Linux games from coming out on GOG. I just opened a thread about it here [External Link].

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: KimmoKMLinus Torvalds has made this same argument much better than I will (defending his harsh language in LKML with retroactive abortations and usage of Finnish swear words because English isn't potent enough) but the fact of the matter is that in the Internet you can't communicate your seriousness with a tone of voice or body language, and non-native English speakers in particular might lack the vocabulary and understanding of connotations to signify they really mean business without resorting to language you wouldn't see offline

Linus Torvalds is a very poor example of proper speech on-line. Most find his justification to be unacceptable.

View this comment - View article - View full comments