Status of ports.

Ryan C. Gordon icculus at
Sun Sep 9 19:33:51 EDT 2001

> What is the status of various ports of physfs?

It works very well on Linux. There's a working proof of concept in the
Build Engine (, which can be compiled to use

I assume it works on other Unix-like systems, like FreeBSD, but no one has
tried it to my knowledge. It doesn't do anything particularly bizarre,
like access the /proc filesystem, so it should either compile natively on
BSD systems, or work through the binary compatibility layer. Again, I
don't think anyone has actually tried it.

There is a win32 port, which builds with Visual Studio 6. Project files
are here: ...
The included test program seems to work, but I haven't tested it very
seriously, and there's one or two incorrect behaviours (CD-ROM drives are
always reported, whether they have a disc available or not). Anything that
might be incorrect in the win32 port is easily fixable, if someone puts
the time into it. It also compiles under Cygwin for win32, except there
isn't Cygwin-specific support in the Makefile for linking as a shared
library (again, trivial to fix, if someone knows how). Theoretically, you
could use the Build Engine as a proof of concept on win32, also, but no
one has, yet.

I have started a MacOS classic port, with CodeWarrior, but there isn't a
Mac-specific backend written yet.

There's at least one byte ordering issue in src/archivers/zip.c which
needs to be resolved for zipfile support on PowerPC processors. Once
again, trivial.

Other ports are non-existant at all, but are just a matter of implementing
the functions found in platform/unix.c (or platform/win32.c) for the new


More information about the physfs mailing list