EMULAB Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

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.

Messages - f205v

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
41
clrmame Discussion / Re: Status
« on: 25 November 2014, 22:28 »
It looks GREAT!

42
clrmame Discussion / Re: Status
« on: 25 November 2014, 11:18 »
The idea of using variables in .ini is wonderfull.
Maybe it could be that you split the .ini in 2 files: gui.ini and engine.ini
In this way, people could share engine.ini and be sure to create the exact same set of roms, leaving them free to have different gui settings on their respective PCs.

43
clrmame Discussion / Re: command prompt / scripting with .bat
« on: 10 October 2014, 08:32 »
time to go public with the source?

just a suggestion...

44
clrmame Discussion / Re: command prompt / scripting with .bat
« on: 09 October 2014, 16:56 »
OK, thank you any way.

45
clrmame Discussion / Re: command prompt / scripting with .bat
« on: 09 October 2014, 13:12 »
Yes, thank you very much for your answer.

I'm using the batcher on a regular base, but it still requires the user to perform the task.

I was looking into a way to automate a number of repetitive tasks:
1-update the svn
2-compile last build
3-create a diffdatfile from latest official to newly compiled build
4-feed it to clrmame
5-rebuild from "unsorted" rom directory
6-scan&fix the "mame-upcaming" rom directory

I'm done with my .bat file up to item 4
I was looking for a way to complete it with 5 and 6

46
clrmame Discussion / command prompt / scripting with .bat
« on: 08 October 2014, 18:58 »
Hi Roman,
is it possible to use clrmame from the command prompt, calling "cmpro.exe" with a number of different parameters?

Thank you in advance for your help.

47
clrmame Discussion / Re: one more thing...
« on: 11 September 2014, 19:39 »
...and a general option to use that in any case (not only hash collisions)...
This I like very much!  :D

48
I do agree with Roman.
In case of merged sets, it would be logical to have the parent (which is somewhat considered "the perfect set" in MAME) into the root of the zipfile, and the various clones into their subdirectory inside the zip.
IMHO this should be valid for all sets, not only for sets with name collisions. It will have both the advantage of a single zipfile (as it is in merged sets now-a-day) and of a humanly readable structure to separate parent from clones (as it is in split sets now-a-day)
Just my 2 cents. Eurocents, off-course!  ;)

49
clrmame Discussion / Re: cmpro 4.09 released
« on: 12 January 2013, 23:19 »
Thank you for the long explanation Roman, very much appreciated.
So basically the general rule should be:
Split set -> ROM merge parsing UNCHECKED
Merge set -> ROM merge parsing CHECKED

Correct?

50
clrmame Discussion / Re: cmpro 4.09 released
« on: 10 January 2013, 09:01 »
- check if you got profiler->options->Parse Disk Merge tags enabled
What about profiler->options->Parse ROMs Merge tag?
should it be enabled or disabled?
I'm keeping split rom sets, btw.

51
clrmame Discussion / Re: Proud Daddy
« on: 15 September 2012, 15:51 »
Best wishes to all your family!

52
clrmame Discussion / Re: cmpro 4.07 released
« on: 13 August 2012, 15:21 »
 :'(

53
clrmame Discussion / Re: cmpro 4.07 released
« on: 12 August 2012, 19:06 »
Hi Roman,
I do not know if this is an error or what.
Check the picture, it's self explanatory.

TIA

54
clrmame Discussion / Re: small request
« on: 23 March 2012, 07:54 »
I just downloaded 4.05, and it works great after disabling version missmatch, Thankyou very much.

55
clrmame Discussion / Re: small request
« on: 21 March 2012, 07:57 »
Thank you!

56
clrmame Discussion / small request
« on: 20 March 2012, 21:03 »
Hi Roman,
yesterday I was checking my "rollback chd" collection with latest clrmame 4.04
The result is that all chd are marked as old version (v3 and v4) and need to be updated to v5.
This is very right from clrmame point of view, but not very much useful for rollback CHDs: if I would like to use an old mame version it will need to utilize an old CHD version as well to work correctly.

Would it be possible to add in some datfile a "forceoldchdversion" command like we have the "forcezip" or "forcemerge"? It function should be to NOT complain if a CHD is old version, and make rom collectors happy again with their green light! ;)

Thanks in advance.

57
clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmamepro 4.00b released
« on: 19 September 2011, 08:35 »
What do you mean with not correct?

Never mind, I was making a mistake. The datfile is correct.

58
clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmamepro 4.00b released
« on: 18 September 2011, 13:54 »
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

59
clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmamepro 4.00b released
« on: 08 September 2011, 17:29 »
misc:  don't write utf8 BOM for old-style dats

Thank you very much!
The old datfile format is now working again!

60
clrmame Discussion / Re: clrmamepro 4.00a released
« on: 06 September 2011, 21:24 »
Hi Roman, looks like I stumbled upon a small glitch.
As usual, after compiling a fresh MAME built I load it up in clrmame and scanner->setinformation->export a datfile for it in the OLD FORMAT.
Then I load the resulting datfile in "listtools.exe" (an old datfile manager) and do all of my datfile updates.

Now with MAME 0.143u5 and clrmame v4.0a the exported datfile in old format has something wrong in it, and it is no more accepted by listtools.

I know that I should discard the old datfile completely and move on to xml, but I still edit all my datfiles with notepad, and the xml format is a pain in the derier to read; the old format in this case is much more easy and straightforward.

Would it be possible for you to have a look at it?
Thanks in advance for your effort.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Page created in 0.146 seconds with 21 queries.

anything
anything