Project64 ported to Linux one day ?

[fery65]

@theboy181

It is a shame that you think like that, even ery sad for someone who work in emulation to preserve retro games. I am not saying PJ64 has to be port to Linux, I said that of course in the title just to give an example that there a lot of OS, multiplaform console or emulators all in one which work well in Linux. There are a lot of initiatives very interesting for all retrogamers to gather all best emulators all in one platform as RetroArch, and I was explaining that the future is that, not linux, I said the future of emulation is to gather all emulators all in one in only one multiplatform. So it would be good to port PJ64 in RetroArch libretro as the future of emulatation is gathering best emulators in one platform.

Now why I said to port PJ64 to linux, because I think there are very interesting projects which are being developed for linux like Batocera OS and Recalbox OS which can be used as a frontend like Hyperspin, but in linux.

Of course windows has good frontend too like hyperspin, lauchbox etc but in general is not plug and play you have work hard to configure very well all emulators and the fontend, it is not as fluid, flowing as other linux os like Batocera or Recalbox. Like the most part of people who do not know how to configure to get a good emulator, these kind of OS project developed by french people not now there are also people from all over the world. It is open for everybody.

Indeed, these OS are using RetroArch emulators and all cores from libretro, it is very interesting because it is very easy to configure emulators, all options are in the same frontend (Recalbox or Batocera) you only have to push a button and that's it, very easy, very pleasant, plug and play, you can make your own mini console with the best emulators all in one. You have a lot of filters, shaders options. That is why I think this kind of projects are the future of emulation, it would be a shame that PJ64, for me the best N64 emulators is absent from this beautiful project.

I am not telling you YOU HAVE TO DO THAT, I am just suggesting you to do that. If PJ64 developpers do not want to do that, that's their own choice, nothing to do, but I think if we are working in an emulator, it is because we like retrogaming so we want to get the best part of it, and doing good projects gathering the best one, like PJ64 is, everybody wins.

Thank you, sorry for my english

François from France

Here's little video presentation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7bDGqJn31s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3T-t9RqU7w&t=1287s

[fery65]

@HatCat

Hello hatcat

Here's an example of good projects of retrogaming:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7bDGqJn31s

François

[HatCat]

I still don't know what you're referring to. Project64 already runs on Android, which is Linux. Is that a "step backwards for OS compatibility sake"?

Originally Posted by theboy181

The topic of doing this port in a day, has me laughing too..

And the topic says "ported to Linux one day", not "ported to Linux in one day".

Humor is good when the laughter isn't sourced from hallucinated insertions of phrases and expressions that were never used.

Thank God you're too stupid to even use any moderator privileges zilmar gave you, or you'd be using them on hallucinated posts that were never made.

[theboy181]

Originally Posted by fery65

@theboy181

It is a shame that you think like that, even ery sad for someone who work in emulation to preserve retro games. I am not saying PJ64 has to be port to Linux, I said that of course in the title just to give an example that there a lot of OS, multiplaform console or emulators all in one which work well in Linux. There are a lot of initiatives very interesting for all retrogamers to gather all best emulators all in one platform as RetroArch, and I was explaining that the future is that, not linux, I said the future of emulation is to gather all emulators all in one in only one multiplatform. So it would be good to port PJ64 in RetroArch libretro as the future of emulatation is gathering best emulators in one platform.

Now why I said to port PJ64 to linux, because I think there are very interesting projects which are being developed for linux like Batocera OS and Recalbox OS which can be used as a frontend like Hyperspin, but in linux.

Of course windows has good frontend too like hyperspin, lauchbox etc but in general is not plug and play you have work hard to configure very well all emulators and the fontend, it is not as fluid, flowing as other linux os like Batocera or Recalbox. Like the most part of people who do not know how to configure to get a good emulator, these kind of OS project developed by french people not now there are also people from all over the world. It is open for everybody.

Indeed, these OS are using RetroArch emulators and all cores from libretro, it is very interesting because it is very easy to configure emulators, all options are in the same frontend (Recalbox or Batocera) you only have to push a button and that's it, very easy, very pleasant, plug and play, you can make your own mini console with the best emulators all in one. You have a lot of filters, shaders options. That is why I think this kind of projects are the future of emulation, it would be a shame that PJ64, for me the best N64 emulators is absent from this beautiful project.

I am not telling you YOU HAVE TO DO THAT, I am just suggesting you to do that. If PJ64 developpers do not want to do that, that's their own choice, nothing to do, but I think if we are working in an emulator, it is because we like retrogaming so we want to get the best part of it, and doing good projects gathering the best one, like PJ64 is, everybody wins.

Thank you, sorry for my english

François from France

Here's little video presentation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7bDGqJn31s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3T-t9RqU7w&t=1287s

No disrespect to your post about your thoughts on the future of emulation. I also don't wish to stop anyone from doing so. I believe that pj64 used in other projects would be beneficial. I do not think the future of emulation is Linux and multi systems don't interest me. I think that when you have more than one core to focus on you loose the ability to maintain your project in a meaningful way.

I see some developers working really hard to keep up and it's a shame that all they ever do is work hard on other people's work. Front ends are better in my opinion but the challenge with that can be making a good front end that deals with all the different challenges an emulator can have.

I think the key idea I was trying to display here was I don't think there is value in zilmar taking time to port PJ64 over. I understand that that there are other talented people who lurk here, but they don't care about them selfs or end users enough to do it either. Ironically they do take they time to point out the faults of the posts on this forum.

[HatCat]

Fun fact: There is still only one Project64-core to my knowledge, and it's in use by both the Android Linux and Windows ports of Project64.

In other words, a multi-platform Project64 being bad because of maintaining more than one core in simultaneity is just another one of your fantasies.

Originally Posted by theboy181

Front ends are better in my opinion but the challenge with that can be making a good front end that deals with all the different challenges an emulator can have.

Yes, front-ends are very complicated flashy graphical applications that need to emulate all of the details of the back-ends in order for the front-end to be an emulator that's not really a front-end.

[thetruegent]

Wouldn't a Version for Apple Mac be cool

[HatCat]

Macintosh is POSIX-conformant, so it is the same modifications involved with porting to Linux, UNIX, or any other POSIX-conformant, non-Windows system. That's as far as porting the core anyway, setting aside API differences in using Apple/CGL to initialize a GL context instead of GLX or WGL.

I do not make any contributions to Project64 that port it from Windows exclusively to Linux and not every other C-conformant platform.