It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
shmerl: Did anyone manage to run Lords of Xulima? Not only it crashes on startup on XFS (seems to be the same old and obnoxious LFS lacking bug in a growing list of 32-bit only games), but it also segfaults even when workaround is used (smaller or non XFS partition). Sounds like a major mess.

Given that I got it as a bonus for Torment: Tides of Numenera, I'm not that upset, but the game is rather unplayable in the current form.

I also noticed this:

Got a SIGSEGV while executing native code. This usually indicates
a fatal error in the mono runtime or one of the native libraries
used by your application.
Works for me on Mint, even finished the game. Only issue I found with it is the slow performance and memory leak after some time. Its not the most optimal port which is a shame considering the awesome game it is.
avatar
shmerl: Did anyone manage to run Lords of Xulima? Not only it crashes on startup on XFS (seems to be the same old and obnoxious LFS lacking bug in a growing list of 32-bit only games), but it also segfaults even when workaround is used (smaller or non XFS partition). Sounds like a major mess.

Given that I got it as a bonus for Torment: Tides of Numenera, I'm not that upset, but the game is rather unplayable in the current form.

I also noticed this:

Got a SIGSEGV while executing native code. This usually indicates
a fatal error in the mono runtime or one of the native libraries
used by your application.
Yet another 32 bit game not working on XFS, but I wouldn't really blame it on the game ;)
avatar
linuxvangog: Yet another 32 bit game not working on XFS, but I wouldn't really blame it on the game ;)
Oh, I'd blame it on developers, not on the game ;) They should learn something about Large File Support. See

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support
* [url=http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html]http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html[/url] (see Using LFS there).

And the fact that on Linux, when they build 32-bit programs, LFS is not enabled by default. Compiler has to be instructed to switch it on. For instance, for GCC you need to compile with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64

To be clear, lack of LFS doesn't just affect files larger than 2GB. It also affects using partitions larger than certain size (which hits XFS more than most).

The problem is complicated by the fact that different filesystems work inconsistently, when LFS is not enabled and the program runs on 64-bit system. The fact that it works on EXT4 more often than on XFS just obscures the problem, and developers think that's how it's supposed to be. Nothing of the sort. They simply are doing an incorrect assumption. So it's not a problem of XFS, it's a problem of developers having no clue about the topic.

And as a responsible distributor, you can ask your QA team to have a routine test, whether the binary is built with LFS or not. Run any incoming 32-bit game on 2TB XFS partition, and if it borks, inform developers about this issue. Educate them. It's much more effective when coming from you, than from us, users who are hit by this obnoxious issue. Even better, ask them to provide 64-bit version to avoid this whole mess.

Given how many game developers are still making this same mistake over and over (including Obsidian in recent Tyranny, who still didn't fix it until now), I'd say such QA check is a must for you.
Post edited February 07, 2017 by shmerl
avatar
linuxvangog: Yet another 32 bit game not working on XFS, but I wouldn't really blame it on the game ;)
avatar
shmerl: Oh, I'd blame it on developers, not on the game ;) They should learn something about Large File Support. See

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_file_support
* [url=http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html]http://users.suse.com/~aj/linux_lfs.html[/url] (see Using LFS there).

And the fact that on Linux, when they build 32-bit programs, LFS is not enabled by default. Compiler has to be instructed to switch it on. For instance, for GCC you need to compile with -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64

To be clear, lack of LFS doesn't just affect files larger than 2GB. It also affects using partitions larger than certain size (which hits XFS more than most).

The problem is complicated by the fact that different filesystems work inconsistently, when LFS is not enabled and the program runs on 64-bit system. The fact that it works on EXT4 more often than on XFS just obscures the problem, and developers think that's how it's supposed to be. Nothing of the sort. They simply are doing an incorrect assumption. So it's not a problem of XFS, it's a problem of developers having no clue about the topic.

And as a responsible distributor, you can ask your QA team to have a routine test, whether the binary is built with LFS or not. Run any incoming 32-bit game on 2TB XFS partition, and if it borks, inform developers about this issue. Educate them. It's much more effective when coming from you, than from us, users who are hit by this obnoxious issue. Even better, ask them to provide 64-bit version to avoid this whole mess.

Given how many game developers are still making this same mistake over and over (including Obsidian in recent Tyranny, who still didn't fix it until now), I'd say such QA check is a must for you.
Not many people are affected by this issue and not many people use XFS. I appreciate your opinion but this is a rare occurrence and certainly we are not going to test games compatibility for niche Linux filesystems. As a workaround, I suggest creating additional ext4 partition on your system.

While I obviously agree that there is a strong preference of having 64 bit Linux games binaries (and yes, we ask developers about those all the time), it's just not always possible - for various reasons.
avatar
linuxvangog: Not many people are affected by this issue and not many people use XFS. I appreciate your opinion but this is a rare occurrence and certainly we are not going to test games compatibility for niche Linux filesystems. As a workaround, I suggest creating additional ext4 partition on your system.

While I obviously agree that there is a strong preference of having 64 bit Linux games binaries (and yes, we ask developers about those all the time), it's just not always possible - for various reasons.
The problem is that XFS just exposes the issue, but building 32-bit programs without LFS is plain wrong. You can of course criticize GCC for not enabling it by default, but that's just how it is. Developers should be aware of that. The least you can do, is simply inform all developers who submit 32-bit games, that they should always enable LFS. It shouldn't be hard to make it a known point, that you communicate to them, no? It might not prevent all such cases from slipping through, but it definitely can reduce their number, if you raise developers' awareness of this issue.
Post edited February 08, 2017 by shmerl
avatar
linuxvangog: Not many people are affected by this issue and not many people use XFS. I appreciate your opinion but this is a rare occurrence and certainly we are not going to test games compatibility for niche Linux filesystems. As a workaround, I suggest creating additional ext4 partition on your system.

While I obviously agree that there is a strong preference of having 64 bit Linux games binaries (and yes, we ask developers about those all the time), it's just not always possible - for various reasons.
avatar
shmerl: The problem is that XFS just exposes the issue, but building 32-bit programs without LFS is plain wrong. You can of course criticize GCC for not enabling it by default, but that's just how it is. Developers should be aware of that. The least you can do, is simply inform all developers who submit 32-bit games, that they should always enable LFS. It shouldn't be hard to make it a known point, that you communicate to them, no? It might not prevent all such cases from slipping through, but it definitely can reduce their number, if you raise developers' awareness of this issue.
Not to mention that it's only going to become a bigger issue with time and, by the time hard drives have grown enough for it to start being common, some developers may have never provided a 64-bit build and yet moved on to new projects, so they're not providing new 32-bit builds either.
Post edited February 08, 2017 by ssokolow
avatar
ssokolow: Not to mention that it's only going to become a bigger issue with time and, by the time hard drives have grown enough for it to start being common, some developers may have never provided a 64-bit build and yet moved on to new projects, so they're not providing new 32-bit builds either.
Indeed. Who said EXT4 is immune to it at even larger partition sizes? Violating the spec relying on undefined behavior is a bad idea, and GOG clearly can do something to make sure developers are aware of this issue.
Post edited February 08, 2017 by shmerl
avatar
ssokolow: Not to mention that it's only going to become a bigger issue with time and, by the time hard drives have grown enough for it to start being common, some developers may have never provided a 64-bit build and yet moved on to new projects, so they're not providing new 32-bit builds either.
avatar
shmerl: Indeed. Who said EXT4 is immune to it at even larger partition sizes? Violating the spec relying on undefined behavior is a bad idea, and GOG clearly can do something to make sure developers are aware of this issue.
Look, like I said, we already ask developers for 64 bit binary. Yes, in every case. We also explain why is that needed, and the list of reasons is long. But it's always up to developer to decide.

The games that cannot get a 64 bit update are usually either:
- old and not updated anymore
- using a legacy codebase
- using a popular engine like Unity, in this case it's the engine developers you want to contact

I don't discard the LFS issue. But it's just one of many issues related to 32 bit builds and trust me, far from being the most common one.
Post edited February 08, 2017 by linuxvangog
avatar
shmerl: Indeed. Who said EXT4 is immune to it at even larger partition sizes? Violating the spec relying on undefined behavior is a bad idea, and GOG clearly can do something to make sure developers are aware of this issue.
avatar
linuxvangog: Look, like I said, we already ask developers for 64 bit binary. Yes, in every case. We also explain why is that needed, and the list of reasons is long. But it's always up to developer to decide.

The games that cannot get a 64 bit update are usually either:
- old and not updated anymore
- using a legacy codebase
- using a popular engine like Unity, in this case it's the engine developers you want to contact

I don't discard the LFS issue. But it's just one of many issues related to 32 bit builds and trust me, far from being the most common one.
Yes, I get it that developers can have practical reasons for not being able to provide 64-bit versions. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying, is it possible for you, to inform developers that if they are providing 32-bit only, they should make sure LFS is enabled? Just mentioning that for them in informative way can mitigate most of such cases. Coming from you, it will increase the quality of submitted versions.
Post edited February 08, 2017 by shmerl
Hello! If I dual boot windows and linux. Can I use the same install folder for both versions of a game?
avatar
stevedice21: Hello! If I dual boot windows and linux. Can I use the same install folder for both versions of a game?
It's not officially supported, but you can make it work in certain circumstances if you're a power user.

If the Windows and Linux versions can share data files, it's pure luck (developers generally don't aim to ensure that works) but it will sometimes work if you install them so that one copy's data files overwrite the other's.

(And you do sometimes find games where, when not offered via GOG installers, the developers simplify their hosting by offering a single zip containing one copy of the data and one copy of each available binary. A common example of that would be Ren'Py-based games like Long Live the Queen.)

If you want to run the Windows version on Linux inside Wine, then it's all up to Wine. If it works in Wine, you can get Windows and Wine sharing the same install.

(You just install into both and let one install overwrite the other. The only reason you need to install it twice is because Windows and Wine can't share the registry and many installers need to add some registry entries.)

I do it all the time with old games that can run on both the Windows 3.11 and Windows 98SE sides of my retro-gaming PC. (Though, technically, it's configuration files rather than the registry that can't be shared there. The Registry was invented after Windows 3.11)

However, if you want to share save files between the two desktops, you may have to muck about with symlinks because many games are new enough that they store their saves in your user profile rather than the game's install folder and I'd be wary of having Wine and Windows share the entire user profile, even if they store the registry under different names.
Post edited February 12, 2017 by ssokolow
avatar
stevedice21: Hello! If I dual boot windows and linux. Can I use the same install folder for both versions of a game?
About the only games you could do that with are the Ren'py based ones like Long Live the Queen.
avatar
stevedice21: Hello! If I dual boot windows and linux. Can I use the same install folder for both versions of a game?
avatar
king_mosiah: About the only games you could do that with are the Ren'py based ones like Long Live the Queen.
Not necessarily.

As an experiment (since it runs fine in Wine), I managed to build an "everything works except music and cutscenes" version of Railroad Tycoon 2 for Linux using a UK CD-ROM for Windows and a manually-unpacked copy of the Loki Games updater which would normally require you to insert a Linux RT2 CD.

That proves that, at most, the only thing that Loki changed about the data files during the Linux port was the music and cutscenes. More modern games are more likely to be using open-source, royalty-free codecs like Ogg Vorbis anyway (or the codecs they license are available on multiple platforms), which may increase the chances of pulling it off.
Post edited February 17, 2017 by ssokolow
Please port GOG galaxy to linux (preferably mint :P). I think you guys would make a killing! Just do what steam does and use WINE as a wrapper and slightly modify your windows client.
avatar
arm_and_hammer: Please port GOG galaxy to linux (preferably mint :P). I think you guys would make a killing! Just do what steam does and use WINE as a wrapper and slightly modify your windows client.
Not really a good idea. Better make an open source client to begin with.