Q2 on linux

[haunted]

Could someone please instruct me, or point me to instructions, for how to get q2 running on ubuntu 10 or 11(if one happens to be easier to do so than the other).

Thanks.

[haunted]

nevermind

[Jay Dolan]

I hope you didn't end up on Ubuntu.. try Linux Mint if you're still getting sorted out w/Linux.

[VaeVictis]

linux was, and never will be, meant for games... however quake still is great on linux due to id software's support of the linux community

also, mint isnt "stable" :/ it does have less issues than say... fedora... but its basically ubuntu with a pretty wrapper

i would suggest mint for a desktop linux system any day of the week as its a great choice, but what most people consider "stable" is just being easier to use for some one who doesnt know anything about linux and thus giving the user less opportunity to screw the system up themselves, not actual stability issues

hope haunted gets everything sorted out, q2 is probably the most difficult quake to get running on linux, though not bad, the other ones are just so easy... debian even has the quake3 point release (minus game data) in the testing repo

[Jay Dolan]

That's an interesting mental leap you make from "stable" to "easy to use." Put plainly, Linux stability on the desktop basically boils down to your video card: with NVidia, you can enjoy a performant system that basically never, ever crashes; with AMD, you are totally, utterly fucked. Unfortunately for me, I have 2x 6970's in Crossfire, and stability and performance for me using fglrx on Debian Testing is just abysmal. No Crossfire support, frequent crashes, no Suspend / Hibernate, can't run fullscreen with Eyefinity, etc.. It's a joke.

I suggested Linux Mint because it still defaults to Gnome2, which is probably the most usable window manager for general computing. Debian Testing defaults to Gnome3 now, which is honestly not bad, just incomplete. And finally, Ubuntu is now pushing Unity full-bore, which is a total turd no matter how you cut it. Users (myself included) have been jumping ship from Ubuntu ever since Canonical decided to all but force its half-baked tablet UI, and cut support for other, mature window managers. I honestly think Unity will be the death of Ubuntu, if they don't pull their heads out of their asses soon.

Anyway, back on topic, following these steps, getting AprQ2 running on Linux isn't too difficult: http://jdolan.dyndns.org/trac/wiki/AprQ2

[VaeVictis]

That's an interesting mental leap you make from "stable" to "easy to use." Put plainly, Linux stability on the desktop basically boils down to your video card: with NVidia, you can enjoy a performant system that basically never, ever crashes; with AMD, you are totally, utterly fucked. Unfortunately for me, I have 2x 6970's in Crossfire, and stability and performance for me using fglrx on Debian Testing is just abysmal. No Crossfire support, frequent crashes, no Suspend / Hibernate, can't run fullscreen with Eyefinity, etc.. It's a joke.

I suggested Linux Mint because it still defaults to Gnome2, which is probably the most usable window manager for general computing. Debian Testing defaults to Gnome3 now, which is honestly not bad, just incomplete. And finally, Ubuntu is now pushing Unity full-bore, which is a total turd no matter how you cut it. Users (myself included) have been jumping ship from Ubuntu ever since Canonical decided to all but force its half-baked tablet UI, and cut support for other, mature window managers. I honestly think Unity will be the death of Ubuntu, if they don't pull their heads out of their asses soon.

Anyway, back on topic, following these steps, getting AprQ2 running on Linux isn't too difficult: http://jdolan.dyndns.org/trac/wiki/AprQ2

some people have really good luck with ati, but its widely known in any linux circle that ati is a nightmare on linux most of the time :/ the open source drivers have come a very long way though and get updated quite frequently, but the way to go is definitely with the nvidia proprietary drivers with a good nvidia card

and i really do think stability from most users point of view isnt stability at all, its mostly just user error, and the ease of use introduced in newer distros that reduces the chance for users to make that error :/ new users can easily fuck stuff up in a CLI, even more so when some one posts some stuff with bad syntax that they just copy and paste... ive seen oops scripts posted on the ubuntu forums that totally wipe your sources file for apt

i mostly suggest mint just cause it takes less set up time, and i do agree that gnome2 is a very friendly UI for new users... but honestly i dropped ubuntu when they started making really weird choices with their normal installs packages :/ i dont use gnome, kde, or unity, and any full blown DE just seems very "in your face" to me, so that was never really a factor to me, and should never be a factor when some one chooses a distro unless they are brand new to linux

[haunted]

I ended up using XP so I could still use AC, getting 120 fps and pinging low... feeling saucy. Lets play on a tx server vae.

[Jay Dolan]

Vae, your posts often wreak of poorly regurgitated 2nd-hand knowledge. If you don't have anything to add to what was already said, there's no sense chiming in, repeating the same information, just to try to appear relevant.

Just curious, haunted, what hardware are you running on? XP is 12 years old, dude 

[haunted]

broke out my old centrino duo laptop from my freshman year in college so, from 2006. It has 1GB of ram, 1.83 ghz pro, and on board gfx.... I had a random idea to allocate some HD space as memory and it had much more of an effect than I thought it would, I can timerefresh at 200 now with 800x600 gl_picmip 0 full-screen. Very new to me / a big difference.

the screen went out on it a year ago, but I have a 17 inch monitor which is the biggest monitor I've ever played q2 on, a new desk, and a nice leather office chair, so my back doesn't hurt after q2ing. Everything is positioned to my liking(the planets are probably aligned as well).

[fdrjk]

XP 

[Jay Dolan]

I honestly don't know how you deal with Windows at all.. nevermind a version that was targeted to run on single-core, 32-bit Pentium III's. Windows just fucking sucks, period, but Win7 is leaps and bounds ahead of XP in every respect, as long as you have more than 2GB of RAM.

I could never get anything even remotely resembling "work" done on a Windows environment. I use Windows7 as an XBox: I turn it on, play a video game, and turn it right off / reboot to Debian.

[Jay Dolan]

I'm actually on OSX Lion 95% of the time But I would have to agree re: Linux. It's as if the moment it becomes usable, they decide to reinvent it and break the f*&$k out of it for everyday users. Case in point; Gnome3 / Unity. In 2010, everyone was happy with Gnome2, and you could install Ubuntu on your [insert non-savvy relative here]'s computer with confidence, knowing that they would be satisfied with their experience. Today, Linux on the desktop is every bit the fragmented shit-show that it was in 2002. So stupid; I'm disgusted with the whole thing.

[VaeVictis]

Vae, your posts often wreak of poorly regurgitated 2nd-hand knowledge. If you don't have anything to add to what was already said, there's no sense chiming in, repeating the same information, just to try to appear relevant.

Just curious, haunted, what hardware are you running on? XP is 12 years old, dude 

dude i run debian stable, never had any kernel panics, never had any issues with kernel modules, never had any issues with dependencies being the wrong version or somethin stupid... and the only segfault i had was from a custom compile of chromium

THAT is stable, i dont touch shit like fedora or ubuntu as often as i used to but i still often have to help people fix their totally broken shit on irc... and yeah most of the time it is a configuration problem, but you see more actual stability issues in the more desktop oriented distros cause they dont have the over the top quality control of debian

honestly most of the time when some one says something like "oh arch isnt stable" or "man i cant get debian to run stable for the life of me" its not an issue of stability but them configuring things poorly

thats what i meant, since i had to say it a third time cause your dumb ass cant register what i was sayin

i simply have to point this shit out because people like alpha who used linux for one week or so make stupid claims like mint is the most stable he found because it was the only one that worked out of the box properly for him

[Jay Dolan]

Uh, Debian Stable is "stable" because there's hardly a single package less than 18 months old in it. You can't have it both ways; you either get newer packages, or stable packages. I'm running Wheezy, and trust me, it's far from stable, and its not due to configuration errors. Point being, Debian isn't necessarily any better or worse at managing defects. If you install Ubuntu 10.10 right now (pretty comparable to Debian Squeeze) it also has far fewer kinks than [insert latest release of any distro here].

[VaeVictis]

Uh, Debian Stable is "stable" because there's hardly a single package less than 18 months old in it. You can't have it both ways; you either get newer packages, or stable packages. I'm running Wheezy, and trust me, it's far from stable, and its not due to configuration errors. Point being, Debian isn't necessarily any better or worse at managing defects. If you install Ubuntu 10.10 right now (pretty comparable to Debian Squeeze) it also has far fewer kinks than [insert latest release of any distro here].

yeah but debian testing is still significantly more stable than say... fedora, or the newest launch of ubuntu... now if you run the sid repos its a whole different story

im just saying, calling mint stable just because it worked out of the box and didnt have any user configuration problems to screw up doesnt mean its stable.... i wouldnt say mint is unstable, but the reasoning behind some one like alpha calling mint stable was uneducated and false