EMULAB Forum
clrmamepro [English] => clrmame Discussion => Topic started by: Roman on 07 September 2011, 22:10
-
well, a little in between holiday release to fix the reported issues...
clrmamepro 4.0b
fixed: rebuilder ignored 'recompress'
fixed: compress to rar/7z created zip files
fixed: little typo in systems dialog
fixed: stats are not kept correctly over sessions (empty stats window)
fixed: biossets with set romof are not handled as biossets (sys1 with soundboard)
misc: don't write utf8 BOM for old-style dats
for the ctreectrl/utf8/easter europe issue, see the other post on my board...
-
misc: don't write utf8 BOM for old-style dats
Thank you very much!
The old datfile format is now working again!
-
well....found a minor issue though....circular renames inside zips won't work (or better it is renamed but ends up with the original zip again...so with next scan you reget the message...it happens for example with tempest3 when you switch from u4 to u5).
I already fixed it in my build but I won't release an update before my holiday...you can easily get around by simply rebuilding the set in question....
-
Hey Roman, how come every time I run a Diff scan after an initial scan it seems to scan the whole MAME set again? This only started happening with the 4.00 builds.
-
hmm...I will have a look, however a diff scan has nothing to do with "something after an initial scan". A diff scan only checks the sets which changed compared to the last version of the dat (e.g. from one MAME update to another).
A "Scan" after a "New Scan" only scans the sets which had an issue in the previous "new scan" or "scan"...so it's limited to one and the same dat. A "diff scan" is not.
-
Oh my, I must have been dreaming! For some weird reason I thought I was using a diff scan and it should be a "scan" as you say after an initial scan. Sorry about that hehe
-
no prob ;) with the utf8 / unicode hell I went through I wouldn't be suprised if I broke diff scan, too ;)
-
clrmamepro 4.0b
misc: don't write utf8 BOM for old-style dats
Hi Roman,
could you please also check the dir2dat routine? If I'm using old datfile format, it looks like the header is not correct.
TIA
-
Hi Roman, I found another bug, when using drag and drop roms in scanner window , clrmame - rebuild, scan and say missing 0 roms, statistic window view - missing 0, Scanner window is empty. But i know missing other roms.
For atm my solution is - close clrmame , open clrmame, clear cache and scan again, Then I see others missing roms.
This problem does not always appear, however,
-
clrmamepro 4.0b
misc: don't write utf8 BOM for old-style dats
Hi Roman,
could you please also check the dir2dat routine? If I'm using old datfile format, it looks like the header is not correct.
TIA
What do you mean with not correct?
-
Hi Roman, I found another bug, when using drag and drop roms in scanner window , clrmame - rebuild, scan and say missing 0 roms, statistic window view - missing 0, Scanner window is empty. But i know missing other roms.
For atm my solution is - close clrmame , open clrmame, clear cache and scan again, Then I see others missing roms.
This problem does not always appear, however,
what do you mean with "know missing other roms". If you do a scan (not a full scan), it will only check the sets which had an issue in a previous scan, so it does not scan all sets. A full scan does this. However if you do a full scan and that reports a missing file, a following scan should list it as well..
...so give me an example what you mean.
-
example, ok...
have any set with 5 missing roms, also have 2 fix roms for this set, when scan in scanner window i view 5 missing roms, drag and drop this 2 roms in scanner window , after scan I expect to see 3 missing roms, but statistic window say miss - 0 and scanner window is empty. If scan fast or normal this set - result is same, missing - 0. If close, open clrmame, click clear cache and scan again same set i view 3 missing roms. This problem rarely makes it. I caught 3 times this Bug
-
What do you mean with not correct?
Never mind, I was making a mistake. The datfile is correct.
-
What do you mean with not correct?
Never mind, I was making a mistake. The datfile is correct.
hehe...thanks for letting me know
-
example, ok...
have any set with 5 missing roms, also have 2 fix roms for this set, when scan in scanner window i view 5 missing roms, drag and drop this 2 roms in scanner window , after scan I expect to see 3 missing roms, but statistic window say miss - 0 and scanner window is empty. If scan fast or normal this set - result is same, missing - 0. If close, open clrmame, click clear cache and scan again same set i view 3 missing roms. This problem rarely makes it. I caught 3 times this Bug
Can't repeat this...