1
clrmame Discussion / Re: better raw file support
« on: 09 June 2014, 15:26 »
That's great. Thank you in advance. :-)
- 19 April 2024, 03:31
- Welcome, Guest
News:
The new forum is online, hope you enjoy it!
Show Posts
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.
Pages: [1] 2
2
clrmame Discussion / Re: better raw file support
« on: 07 June 2014, 21:44 »
Yes, indeed, unpacked.
As surprising as it may sound, some sets gain nothing from being packed. Due to copy protections, they do not compress at all and packing them is entirely pointless.
As surprising as it may sound, some sets gain nothing from being packed. Due to copy protections, they do not compress at all and packing them is entirely pointless.
3
clrmame Discussion / better raw file support
« on: 07 June 2014, 15:28 »
Hi Roman,
Any chance we get a better raw file support? Especially a scan result cache feature for raw files.
Currently clrmamepro rechecks raw files hashes at every scan, whether you select "new scan" or just "scan", and it's a real hassle when the files are really large (for example sets from redump.org).
Any chance we get a better raw file support? Especially a scan result cache feature for raw files.
Currently clrmamepro rechecks raw files hashes at every scan, whether you select "new scan" or just "scan", and it's a real hassle when the files are really large (for example sets from redump.org).
4
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 24 January 2013, 06:06 »
It's true for a single individual wiping of 40 gigs (which does not include gain from lzma in chd v5) is certainly not very much significant. But looking at it more globally, the gain in both hard drive space and bandwidth cumulated across all the people who would use/share may not be that ridiculous.
But to be entirely honest, I would not recommend 7zip to anybody other than casual users who just need to have a set ready for some occasional testing/development or whatever AND who do not update frequently.
People who use MAME on a regular basis as gamers or who update their set frequently should stick to zip. The extra loading time for sets with a lot of clones and the extra computing resources needed to maintain regularly a set make 7zip not very appealing to those users which I'm not part of.
But to be entirely honest, I would not recommend 7zip to anybody other than casual users who just need to have a set ready for some occasional testing/development or whatever AND who do not update frequently.
People who use MAME on a regular basis as gamers or who update their set frequently should stick to zip. The extra loading time for sets with a lot of clones and the extra computing resources needed to maintain regularly a set make 7zip not very appealing to those users which I'm not part of.
5
clrmame Discussion / Re: chd issues
« on: 23 January 2013, 21:24 »
1) ok but wouldn't it make more sense to mark them as bad/mismatching rather than unneeded and outright ask you to trash them, for someone who wouldn't be careful and click "yes to all" it is a complete disaster
2) having them separate is more convenient for my torrent use, one of the best features in clrmame is to have as many folders as you want, but at the same time I'd like to be able to discriminate the mechanical stuff for the same reason I discriminate chd, they may not be wanted/included in torrents
2) having them separate is more convenient for my torrent use, one of the best features in clrmame is to have as many folders as you want, but at the same time I'd like to be able to discriminate the mechanical stuff for the same reason I discriminate chd, they may not be wanted/included in torrents
6
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 23 January 2013, 14:00 »
before locking this topic, I can post the final global compression ratio results since the rebuilder finally finished
mame 0.145
18664 sets, 187899 roms, raw : 139GB, zip : 64.368GB
global compression ratio : 0,46307913669064748201438848920863
mame 0.148
28427 sets, 211052 roms, raw : 150GB, 7zip : 28,396GB
global compression ratio : 0,18930666666666666666666666666667
mame 0.145
18664 sets, 187899 roms, raw : 139GB, zip : 64.368GB
global compression ratio : 0,46307913669064748201438848920863
mame 0.148
28427 sets, 211052 roms, raw : 150GB, 7zip : 28,396GB
global compression ratio : 0,18930666666666666666666666666667
7
clrmame Discussion / chd issues
« on: 23 January 2013, 13:44 »
1) it seems clrmame pro is reporting all CHD bad dumps as unneeded
2) when activating system default paths it seems I can no longer keep my current structure (/roms/ and /chd/ on different folders) because clrmame can not assign more than 1 path per system
2) when activating system default paths it seems I can no longer keep my current structure (/roms/ and /chd/ on different folders) because clrmame can not assign more than 1 path per system
8
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 19 January 2013, 03:29 »
That worked fine, thank you Roman, still as helpful as ever, even with (seemingly) "ungrateful bastards" such as myself. 
I may sound rude at times, but I am really grateful for clrmame pro, saved me a lot of time. clrmame will remain my main rom manager for all zipped or raw sets, but for 7zip I will start looking at the competition. I believe the root of all of this is in clrmame being a file based manager instead of a set based manager, that can not work fine with 7zip unfortunately precisely because it's not as file based as zip is, that's as much its flaw some will say as it is its power others will say. Fact if you compress a file duplicated 100 times, the resulting zip archive will be 100 times bigger, and it's not true for 7zip, so while it is nowhere as fast as zip, that "checking ahead" is part of what is making 7zip the most powerful archiver in term of ratio. 7zip is being particularly efficient when combined with parent-clone merging so all the more reason to use it with all sets supporting parent-clone relationship.
I may sound rude at times, but I am really grateful for clrmame pro, saved me a lot of time. clrmame will remain my main rom manager for all zipped or raw sets, but for 7zip I will start looking at the competition. I believe the root of all of this is in clrmame being a file based manager instead of a set based manager, that can not work fine with 7zip unfortunately precisely because it's not as file based as zip is, that's as much its flaw some will say as it is its power others will say. Fact if you compress a file duplicated 100 times, the resulting zip archive will be 100 times bigger, and it's not true for 7zip, so while it is nowhere as fast as zip, that "checking ahead" is part of what is making 7zip the most powerful archiver in term of ratio. 7zip is being particularly efficient when combined with parent-clone merging so all the more reason to use it with all sets supporting parent-clone relationship.
9
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 14 January 2013, 22:07 »
the ignored switches shouldn't be a problem, the switches were there when I was using windows 7zip and just forgot to remove them when changing to t7z, but they are just ignored, not the real issue there
the real issue appears to be it believes "b" is a parameter while it's really a filename, all other single letter filenames failed too, not sure if there is a way to go around this, may indeed be considered as a t7z bug
but although that single letter filename scenario is the only one I could reproduce, it's not the only one where rebuilder failure happens, it also happen very often in other scenarios which I was unable to reproduce, these errors seemed to be completely random and for some reason t7z didn't make any log as it's supposed to when failing, why? no idea
the real issue appears to be it believes "b" is a parameter while it's really a filename, all other single letter filenames failed too, not sure if there is a way to go around this, may indeed be considered as a t7z bug
but although that single letter filename scenario is the only one I could reproduce, it's not the only one where rebuilder failure happens, it also happen very often in other scenarios which I was unable to reproduce, these errors seemed to be completely random and for some reason t7z didn't make any log as it's supposed to when failing, why? no idea
10
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 14 January 2013, 20:20 »
isn't t7z basically a strict cross platform version of 7zip, so therefore less prone to OS specific bugs. mame is compatible with strict cross platform 7zip too, and some 7z files made by windows 7z binaries may not work, so doesn't make much sense to support win 7zip and not t7z
just my 0.02
just my 0.02
11
clrmame Discussion / Re: some questions : filename collision and imported softlist
« on: 14 January 2013, 10:07 »
Yes I will opt for separate lists then. From what I heard softlist import is causing a shitstorm of epic proportion, don't know all the details, but I heard mame can no longer handle chd folder properly and other fun stuff like that.
12
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 14 January 2013, 10:02 »
the problem isn't that much about 7zip being slow than rebuilder failing and ever prompting me, if not for that prompt it would have ended over night
fact: 7zip is now fully supported by MAME, but nobody can force you to add full 7z support to cmpro, it's up to you
the reason why I rebuild the whole set is because of 7z support added to MAME, last time I updated 7zip was not supported, so it's time to recompress my whole set and use all the power of 7z-parent-clone-merging, my estimations based on a sample of file is the set will be reduced to 64% of its current zipped size which is more that enough to convince me and all torrent users
fact: 7zip is now fully supported by MAME, but nobody can force you to add full 7z support to cmpro, it's up to you
the reason why I rebuild the whole set is because of 7z support added to MAME, last time I updated 7zip was not supported, so it's time to recompress my whole set and use all the power of 7z-parent-clone-merging, my estimations based on a sample of file is the set will be reduced to 64% of its current zipped size which is more that enough to convince me and all torrent users
13
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 14 January 2013, 09:20 »We can discuss about showing the prompt of simply skip it....that's on my list for ages...but did not have time yet to implement it.You should consider it within the next 200 days then because it's the time it will take to rebuild 0.148 set if you do nothing ;P
BTW I'm using torrent7z so it's a stable version, not some beta, I suspect a memory issue too, it's not an anti virus conflict for sure since the whole cmp folder and the destination folder are both excluded from surveillance
14
clrmame Discussion / Re: some questions : filename collision and imported softlist
« on: 14 January 2013, 09:14 »
1) that's what I feared, merge-split is definitely not an option then
you may add on you to-do list the following tho it would be very low priority, instead of entirely removing the parent clone relationship, why not just move the faulty roms individually into the clone set, mame is perfectly able to load a game with roms scattered through bios/parent/clones sets. Low priority because it wouldn't save much space, even with 7z-merget set, probably not more than 1 gig although I would need to look into the details of the affected sets
2) OK, but if I do not import these lists will I miss the softlists-only sets then? because missing sets would be far worse than having dupes, sometimes you need to choose between the lesser evil
you may add on you to-do list the following tho it would be very low priority, instead of entirely removing the parent clone relationship, why not just move the faulty roms individually into the clone set, mame is perfectly able to load a game with roms scattered through bios/parent/clones sets. Low priority because it wouldn't save much space, even with 7z-merget set, probably not more than 1 gig although I would need to look into the details of the affected sets
2) OK, but if I do not import these lists will I miss the softlists-only sets then? because missing sets would be far worse than having dupes, sometimes you need to choose between the lesser evil
15
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 14 January 2013, 07:15 »
checked computer after waking up, and it failed again after creating 500 files, so if it stops every 500 files and I have to resume manually two times a day (after sleep and after work) then it's going to rebuild 1000 files per day, MAME 0.148 has 214451 files so it's going to take 200 days to rebuild mame set? Whyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy? 
16
clrmame Discussion / Re: some questions : filename collision and imported softlist
« on: 13 January 2013, 23:22 »
1) and what does it do exactly to selct no to this
will it force split merge for this set, or for the whole mame set (as it says "mode"and if only for this set what's exactly the difference between split-merge and no P/C relashionship?
2) in case I'd import neogeo softlist, neogeo set will move to neogeo subfolder but isn't there a risk of duplicates? some neogeo sets present in both neogeo subfolder and in main folder?
Thank you.
Quote
Set: Best League (bootleg of Big Striker, Italian Serie A)
Name: bestleag
ROM: 2.bin
Issue: Can't merge set due to equal names for different ROM hashes
Press yes to remove parent/clone relationship or no to force split-merge mode.
will it force split merge for this set, or for the whole mame set (as it says "mode"and if only for this set what's exactly the difference between split-merge and no P/C relashionship?
2) in case I'd import neogeo softlist, neogeo set will move to neogeo subfolder but isn't there a risk of duplicates? some neogeo sets present in both neogeo subfolder and in main folder?
Thank you.
17
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 13 January 2013, 23:09 »
yes should be more specific sorry
still the same problem as OP
happening when rebuilding whole 0.148 mame set with torrent7z in merged mode
verified the source set "avengrgs.zip" was not corrupt
verified the target set avengrgs.7z, not corrupt either and does contain mcg-04.3j cmpro reported, that file is also still there in cmpro temp folder
I've had tons of these errors and if only we could have an "always ignore" option to tick at first error, would help big time, now going to sleep, it will fail and stop, tomorrow morning I'll resume go to work and when back it will be stopped again and so on for days in all likelihood =/
still the same problem as OP
happening when rebuilding whole 0.148 mame set with torrent7z in merged mode
verified the source set "avengrgs.zip" was not corrupt
verified the target set avengrgs.7z, not corrupt either and does contain mcg-04.3j cmpro reported, that file is also still there in cmpro temp folder
I've had tons of these errors and if only we could have an "always ignore" option to tick at first error, would help big time, now going to sleep, it will fail and stop, tomorrow morning I'll resume go to work and when back it will be stopped again and so on for days in all likelihood =/
18
clrmame Discussion / Re: suggestion for an optimization for the rebuilder
« on: 13 January 2013, 19:47 »
Any progress? With all due respect maybe it's time to entirely rewrite cmpro?
When your rom manager writes 50 gigs of data on your HDD to make a 1 gig archive, you know there is a problem somewhere.
When your rom manager writes 50 gigs of data on your HDD to make a 1 gig archive, you know there is a problem somewhere.
19
clrmame Discussion / Re: A rebuilder request and a rebuilder question
« on: 13 January 2013, 19:42 »
currently rebuilding whole 0.148 set and I see this problem still here, cmpro keeps randomly complaining about issues and I have no choice other than resuming manually whenever it happens, I wanted to let the rebuilder work over night but no doubt it's gonna fail at some point, wonder how many days it will take once again to complete the process and resuming whenever I'm back from work or wake up =/
20
clrmame Discussion / some questions : filename collision and imported softlist
« on: 13 January 2013, 12:14 »
Time to update mame set after a whole year of release skipping
while importing database from mame binaries several things appeared unclear to me
1. filenames collision, when two files from a parent-clone set have same filename and different hash
cmpro asking you to either remove parent clone relationship which seems lame to me, OR force split-merged, but what's the difference between the latter and removing P/C ? Also would it apply only to the one faulty rom or to the whole set? Haven't found answers anywhere.
2. software list import
again very unclear, clrmame says it detects softlists, but nowhere it is said which one it detects, the last mame 0.148 package from mamedev includes all softlists whether mame or mess, so is cmpro going to import all of them or can it select the mame-only ones? and what would be the pros/cons of not importing softlist as cmpro suggests, would that avoid duplicate sets for instance?
Thank in advance
while importing database from mame binaries several things appeared unclear to me
1. filenames collision, when two files from a parent-clone set have same filename and different hash
cmpro asking you to either remove parent clone relationship which seems lame to me, OR force split-merged, but what's the difference between the latter and removing P/C ? Also would it apply only to the one faulty rom or to the whole set? Haven't found answers anywhere.
2. software list import
again very unclear, clrmame says it detects softlists, but nowhere it is said which one it detects, the last mame 0.148 package from mamedev includes all softlists whether mame or mess, so is cmpro going to import all of them or can it select the mame-only ones? and what would be the pros/cons of not importing softlist as cmpro suggests, would that avoid duplicate sets for instance?
Thank in advance
Pages: [1] 2