Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

1

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmamepro unzippping some sets into separate folders

« on: 28 April 2025, 06:13 »

1st question would be: Why was it touched? Was it missing in the first place and either a rebuilder step or scanner fix missing picked it up from somewhere and added it? Or was something wrong with the file so that any kind of fix operation touched it?
If this is unknown, you can still check rebuilder->compress files needs to be ticked for rebuild operations. The scanner (fix missing for example) decides on its own which pack method to use for new files. Initially it simply counts the occurences of existing archives (or folders) in rompaths. So normally if you keep your files zipped, it will follow that.
You can move the unpacked files to a separate place and check if a normal scan unpacks the still existing archives again. Or you can move both and readd them either with the rebuilder or fixmissing/addpaths to see how they get added. In other words: Check if this is repeatable. Generally, hard to say what happened in old clrmamepro

...use the new tool instead ;-)

2

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame 0.4 released

« on: 21 April 2025, 13:58 »

I always wondered why people look at stats.....an empty scan results window is what you should look for ;-)

Currently stats aren't planned but surely the upcoming profiler will indicate a datfile status, too

3

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame 0.4 released

« on: 21 April 2025, 09:28 »

There isn't really a stats screen but the log output says a bit about the number of complete/empty/partly wrong machines

4

clrmame Discussion / clrmame 0.4 released

« on: 20 April 2025, 17:01 »

https://mamedev.emulab.it/clrmamepro/binaries/clrmame_v04.zip
https://mamedev.emulab.it/clrmamepro/binaries/readme.html

UI:

- scanner, fixed showing of empty and complete machines
- scanner, fixed showing of non rom/sample/disk related machine/file/folder issues

Core:

- added: read/write support for zstandard compressed zip files
- rebuilder, two zstd compression methods added, newly created/added files   will use it (existing destination files which don't get replaced won't be   updated). Source files which don't use the set compression method won't be taken into account when checking for a direct archive copy
- scanner, automatically detects if you prefer zstd or deflate compressed zips and uses the preferred setting the case that new files are added.
- with both, rebuilder/scanner you can theoretically end up with zip files which have files in it with different compression methods. Rebuilder: if you
  rebuild to existing files, scanner, if you already have a mixture of archives using different compression methods.

- added: scanner, reporting 'wrong' chd version. Current expected version is 5, warning is not shown for baddumps. Version and baddump warning can be altered in settings.xml

- misc:  changed the behaviour of devices which have romOf dependencies. When fully merging such devices they are now handled like parent/clone machines. On the one hand it makes sense since there are merge attributes indicating that such sets belong together but there are also cases where they are distinct. This is now aligned with clrmamepro, but still something which might need further discussion

- misc:  updated cli11 to 2.5.0
- misc:  updated spdlog to 1.15.2
- misc:  updated bit7z to 4.0.10

- misc:  scanner, using absolute pathnames for error reporting in path scan
- misc:  scanner, only trace-log machines with issues in fixing phase
- fixed: scanner, typo "uneeded"
- fixed: scanner: detection of empty but unneeded folders in archives
- fixed: scanner, backup of chds in software list collections can fail
- fixed: scanner, archives which match a valid rompath subfolder name (e.g. softwarelist name via pattern or automatically) are falsely iterated like a folder instead of listing them as unneeded (wrong placed)
- fixed: crash on rom definitions without a crc
- fixed: filter enrichment might miss sampleof dependencies
- fixed: doing archive backups from a folder and backup archive already exists creates a new archive instead of merging files in

5

clrmame Discussion / Re: Easter egg

« on: 16 April 2025, 12:13 »

last clue....

6

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame just closing

« on: 15 April 2025, 17:41 »

Thanks, problem found (missing crc in listxml output). Fixed the exception for next version, however, missing crc should be reported to MAME Devs (2 roms in tpoker2)

7

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame just closing

« on: 15 April 2025, 05:21 »

Ah it crashes for you during data import (shouldnt answer posts without having a coffee first). I will check it. Can you please send me the used exe file?

8

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame just closing

« on: 15 April 2025, 04:47 »

Sounds like the not repeatable crash when starting fixing which was reported here before. Users reported that it just closes when fixing starts and shows 0%.
Is it the same for you? Does a scan without fixing work?
If you can repeat it with a minimal set (e.g with just the files which needs fixing), can you somehow zip the whole installation and give it to me?
The  content of Backup folder might also play a role though……or threading (that can be tested by setting the threads to 1)
Users reported the problem when some versions ago two amiga sl were renamed/reorganzied.
Unfortunatey I wasnt able to repeat it yet

9

clrmame Discussion / Re: Easter egg

« on: 13 April 2025, 10:24 »

 If you know it zip your mouth…

10

clrmame Discussion / Re: Easter egg

« on: 12 April 2025, 07:50 »

ok..maybe too hard to guess.....

11

clrmame Discussion / Easter egg

« on: 11 April 2025, 18:51 »

93 (0x5D)


;-)

….coming to clrmameUI…so not an active easter egg yet

12

clrmame Discussion / Re: Questions...

« on: 09 April 2025, 07:20 »

Well I asked for your binary because I wanted to check how the -listxml output differs from the official one :-)
I know from other forums that mameUI sometimes is some commits ahead of the official mame release...
I don't expect something really obvious in that output for the "chds from backup -> sample path" move but who knows....

Update: Well, the -listxml output does differ from the official one but nothing really which gives a reason why chds from backup gets copied to your samples folder....this really does not make any sense. Files from backup are only copied back to a rompath (!!) when it matches a missing file (crc32+size, optionally sha1 match).
What you can double check is, open settings.xml in a texteditor and search for your samplepath if it's somewhere listed where it shouldn't be listed...

13

clrmame Discussion / Re: Questions...

« on: 08 April 2025, 19:33 »

Since you're using a mameui.exe, can you send me that?

14

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame 0.3 released

« on: 08 April 2025, 09:23 »

Would be great to know how your config looks like, so maybe you can send me your settings.xml file. Additionally maybe some information about the sl files themselves...zip/7z/decompressed...

15

clrmame Discussion / Monthly sneak

« on: 07 April 2025, 20:08 »

Well...it's been a while so maybe you're interested what's happening behind the scenes...

well, first of all, I started with the profiler. Nothing to show/work at the moment since a) real life keeps me extemely busy and b) there are some other core tasks to do.

So here what's already in the next version:
UI:
- scanner, fixed showing of empty and complete machines
- scanner, fixed showing of non rom/sample/disk related machine issues (e.g. wrong named machine)

Core:
- added: scanner reports 'wrong' chd version. Current expected version is 5, warning is not shown for baddumps. Version and baddump warning can be altered in settings.xml
- misc:  updated cli11 to 2.5.0
- misc:  updated spdlog to 1.15.2
- misc:  using absolute pathnames for error reporting during path scan
- misc:  only list machines with issues as trace output in fixing phase
- fixed: typo "uneeded"
- fixed: filter enrichment might miss sampleof dependencies
- fixed: doing archive backups from a folder and backup archive already exists creates a new archive instead of merging files in
- fixed: archives which match a valid rompath subfolder name (e.g. softwarelist name via pattern or automatically) are falsely iterated like a folder instead of listing them as unneeded (wrong placed)


Still in the queue:

- trying to repeat the crash which 2 users reported  when fixing the Amiga SL 1000/3000 change (MAME 274-275). Unfortunately I can't repeat it at all at the moment...so if anyone is able to repeat it, please contact me (see https://www.emulab.it/forum/index.php?topic=9882.msg27364#msg27364)
- trying to find out how chds were placed in a samples folder (see https://www.emulab.it/forum/index.php?topic=9893.0)
- checking some WINE SHA1 checking warnings
- trying to align clrmamepro and clrmame/UI for devices which have a romof dependency and use or don't use merge attributes on files. Currently I think that clrmameUI does it right...but I need to compare and check...

16

clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmame 0.3 released

« on: 07 April 2025, 15:45 »

I tried it several times but never ran into a crash.
If you can somehow repeat this issue with a minimal setup (e.g. just the 2  amiga folders with e.g. 1 file in it), let me know. Most likely I also need details about the backupfolder and the used settings (e.g. sending settings.xml) in general

17

clrmame Discussion / Re: Questions...

« on: 04 April 2025, 08:30 »

1) actually I've added it yesterday, so it will be in the next release
2) ;-) Overwriting won't help if file A+B was replaced with C which includes A and B......you ended up with A,B and C...and so you have the files mulitplied...
3) very very strange one indeed....there are 3 very very unlikely possibilites:

- You did a rebuild and had your samples folder as destination folder
- You had your samplefolder specified as backup folder (but that would mean that the chd files were somehow marked as unneeded)
- The algorithm which decides where to put a wrong placed files somehow picked the samples folder, however chds/roms and samples are strictly separated...but I will have a look at it....But that would also mean that the chds were somehow wrongly placed in the first scan....

18

clrmame Discussion / Re: Questions...

« on: 03 April 2025, 07:34 »

1) chd version mismatch check will come soon in clrmame. SHA1 check won't solve the problem

2) Hmm..no, actually it detects the old ones as unneeded and sees them as fill ins for the "new" megacd. They get 'moved' to the new place. However, maybe you did not do a clean install of your MAME hash folder and still got the old hash files in their. clrmameui first takes all from -listsoftware and then scans the hash folder for additional ones which are not listed in the xml output (there are a couple which aren't included for whatever reason). So if you don't clean MAME's hash folder before unpacking the new version over it, you still get the old ones in there and clrmame will read them in as additional sl.

3) ? weird one. Unless the samples folder isn't listed as backup folder somewhere. You could check the settings.xml file for this....but the screenshot doesn't correspond to that. Is there a repeatable small scenario for it? I can try to build one based on that screenshot....

19

clrmame Discussion / Re: Impropper Handling of "wrong merged" Moves

« on: 01 April 2025, 11:23 »

What do you mean in detail?

If you get a "wrong merged ROM set" message it means that you use full merged sets and have a clone set somewhere which shouldn't be there since in full merge mode, all clone files need to be placed in the parent set and the clone set itself doesn't exist. The parent set isn't moved.

Maybe you need to give a detailed example....and actually I don't understand your 7z file updates comment...

20

clrmame Discussion / Re: Problem Scanning an SMB Volume

« on: 26 March 2025, 15:04 »

looks good ...check if the rompaths are fine....the input fields are rather small in width but can hold multiple long values which might be hidden