@Substring said in uae4arm v0.5 - testrun under retropie4.1 by amiga professional:
@RustyMG If you're talknig about retropie, their philosophy is much different than ours. In their opinion, it's up to the user to configure every emulator on their own, when recalbox aims a "configuration-less" experience. Of course I could have added an amiga emulator and say "guyz, plug a keyboard, and you're on your own to configure", but that's not how we, at Recalbox, see things.
With the CD32 Emulator this is no longer a problem.
No keyboard - done
No mouse - done
One unified configuration - done
So, as long as we can't release a "recalbox-spirit emulator", we don't do it.
recalbox-spirit - done (in my opinion)
we only add emulators that have a meaning
It is listed under "Board Compatibility"
https://github.com/recalbox/recalbox-os/wiki/Board-Compatibility-(EN)
I understand this as "emulator that have a meaning"
Anyway, no time yet for amiga. Among things i'm trying to solve, C64 is the priority.
Amiberry is raspberry pi only, which is quite a b*mmer for odroid boards
... Having an arch specific emulator is not what I believe to be the best thing for recalbox. It would really sadden me (and take sooo much dev time) to have say amiberry for pi, uae4arm on odroid and fs-uae for x86 ...
The offical way seems to be different ...
https://github.com/recalbox/recalbox-os/wiki/Board-Compatibility-(EN)
It is not the only emulator thats integrated for one specific system.
Take x86 (Wii) or missing emulators for PI1&PI2.
From this perspective, I find your argument quite weak.
And CD32 is like emulating A1200 ... it's still the same deal : have the emulator, and preconfigure it in the recalbox philosophy and scripts. To be honest, I personnaly don't have much time for now to do anything else than support.
You've listed a lot of personal reasons.
I feel somewhat reminded of the 80/90s computer wars.
Where can I find offical developer support?
BR
André