Page 1 of 1
Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2020 2:30 pm
by commander_STyx2909
I ran into a trouble here.
I stumbled upon these errors in the log:
Code: Select all
14:21:50.870 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M1
14:21:50.871 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M0
14:21:50.871 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M3
14:21:50.872 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_CABAL_COMMON_SPECIALMARKETS
14:21:50.872 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_COLORS
14:21:50.872 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_CABAL_COMMON_COMM
14:21:50.872 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M4
14:21:50.872 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M5
14:21:50.873 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_M2
14:21:50.873 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_CCL_OXPS_MINE
14:21:50.873 [oxp-standards.deprecated]: TL99 is deprecated for EQ_OXPCONFIG_W0
And so reversed all the 23 OXPs added 1 by 1 to discover what caused it, to finally discover there are no differences and I can not reproduce errors in the log.
Here is the list of OXPs:
Code: Select all
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Staer9.Icesteroids.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.spara.random_player-ship_name.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.EscapePodLocator.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Wildeblood.BulletDrive.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.RetroRockets.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.Neo-Docklights.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Wildeblood.Contracted_Goods_Reminder.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.OoCheat.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Svengali.BGS.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.CommandersLog.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.Pods.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.spara.market_observer.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.FlightLog.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.stranger.HabitableMainPlanets.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Svengali.OXPConfig.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.stranger.MoonsTexturePack.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.TrafficControl.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Astrobe.ShakyDrive.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Svengali.CCL.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Thargoid.WelcomeMat.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.stranger.SunGear.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.zireael.laser-colors.oxz
~/GNUstep/Library/ApplicationSupport/Oolite/ManagedAddOns/oolite.oxp.Svengali.Library.oxz
The ONLY point I am certain at this time, SPARA's market observer was the latest OXP added to the serie. But as stated above, error couldn't be reproduced... life can be cruel.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Sun Dec 20, 2020 3:02 pm
by Reval
Mind if I ask why a few 'deprecated' messages in your log matter so much to you? (matter enough to create BB topics about them, I mean). My logs are full of this sort of thing and I'm not bothered by them in the least... at worst, they're merely reflecting the fact that some of the OXPs you have installed are oldish. We all have plenty of those (because many of them are great and worth having).
Actual scripting ERRORS are a different matter, of course, but I saw none in your listing. Those messages are merely informational.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 12:07 am
by stranger
There are "yellow alerts", not critical "red alerts". There are no fatal flaws in these old OXPs - just obsolete ways of using properties (in this case seems obsolete way of processing TL 99 setting to define equipment TL using script). I'll disagree with recommendation "just ignore it". At least, yellow alert indicates that OXP may not work as intended. You can use these old OXPs as is, but it will be good to fix issues if you need reliable stable OXPs updated to modern standards. Sometimes there are errors in very specific situations, like aborted hyperjump onto interstellar space. Most players will never come onto such situations and these flaws will be not critical for game experience. But if you can fix it in advance - do it. Shit happens.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:39 am
by phkb
I think (and I haven't confirmed this) but Oolite doesn't do the full deprecation check thing on every launch. It might only be when there's been a change from the last time it ran. Which is why the messages don't appear in every run.
As for those messages, OXP Config (oolite.oxp.Svengali.CCL.oxz) and Cabal Common Library (oolite.oxp.Svengali.CCL.oxz) are the two likely suspects, both of which have been upgraded (via the Library OXP). I'd only install those two OXP's if another OXP requires them.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 8:48 am
by cag
According to the wiki,
http://wiki.alioth.net/index.php/Equipment.plist
The first entry is an integer that determines the technical level from which the equipment can be bought. A level of 99 has a special meaning.
looks like the "special meaning" was to allow equipment anywhere (no tech level restriction). I've no idea how it's supposed to be done now.
A search of 690 oxp's from
http://www.oolite.org/oxps/ give a total of 919 occurances!
Culprits: (list may be incomplete)
Armoury_1.20.oxz
AssassinsGuild-1.3.3.oxz
Cabal_Common_Library_1.7.2.oxz
CombatMFD-1.14.oxz
Deep_Horizon_Emergency_Witchspace_Initiator.oxz
EscapePodLocator-1.4.1.oxz
EscortDeck_1.11.oxz
EscortPack.1.2.oxz
ETT_Homing_Beacon_1.02.oxz
Feudal_States_1.16.3.oxz
Fireworks_1.2.oxz
HardShips_0.89.oxz
Hyperradio_1.26.1.oxz
Laser_Booster_1.02.oxz
MincePie_1.1.oxz
Neocaduceus.oxz
NumericHUD_3.27.oxz
Oolite.oxp.Thargoid.Armoury.oxz
OxpConfig_2.3.4.oxz
Q-Charger_1.25.oxz
ResistanceCommander_1.6.oxz
SafetyCatch_1.3.oxz
Santa_1.2.oxz
Ships_cat_alpha_1.1.0.oxz
ShipVersion_1.24.oxz
TCAT_1.11.oxz
TechnicalReferenceLibrary-1.0.1.oxz
Tianve-1.3.oxz
Towbar-1.0.oxz
Vector_1.7.2.oxz
Vortex-1.32.oxz
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 11:19 am
by spara
It's been a while since TL99 was used, but if my memory serves me correct, it was basically used to hide equipment from the shop. That equipment could then be awarded via other means as a part of a mission or something. To my understanding the current method for managing this kind of stuff is by using a condition script in equipment.plist.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 11:25 am
by Cody
spara wrote: ↑Mon Dec 21, 2020 11:19 am... it was basically used to hide equipment from the shop...
<nods>
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 1:01 pm
by commander_STyx2909
Reval wrote: ↑Sun Dec 20, 2020 3:02 pm
Mind if I ask why a few 'deprecated' messages in your log matter so much to you? (matter enough to create BB topics about them, I mean). My logs are full of this sort of thing and I'm not bothered by them in the least... at worst, they're merely reflecting the fact that some of the OXPs you have installed are oldish. We all have plenty of those (because many of them are great and worth having).
Actual scripting ERRORS are a different matter, of course, but I saw none in your listing. Those messages are merely informational.
Hey.
I did not mean it was urgent.
I did not mean you had to fix it.
Currently my point of view is rather let checks all these OXPs and see how they handle with 1.90, so new players won't have to lose time with it.
Old geeks ready to spend 12 to 18 hours to try running something in the correct way are rather unexpected. If you have to build a base of new fan boys for this good work done so far, be advised new users don't like spending time troubleshooting stuff: It works, great, it doesn't at first or it is too complicated to understand => bye bye.
It is a new generation of players. Would they have accepted waiting 30 minutes to load a game saved on tapes? NO. I know what it is. Could even be 45 minutes and a failure!
So far, currently, is there a excel sheet like referencing all OXPs with their status, compatibility issues, that could be public and used by us in addition with the wiki, so the wiki remains oriented on the description instead? I think this could be a good start.
What do you think.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Mon Dec 21, 2020 2:35 pm
by commander_STyx2909
phkb wrote: ↑Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:39 am
I think (and I haven't confirmed this) but Oolite doesn't do the full deprecation check thing on every launch. It might only be when there's been a change from the last time it ran. Which is why the messages don't appear in every run.
As for those messages, OXP Config (oolite.oxp.Svengali.CCL.oxz) and Cabal Common Library (oolite.oxp.Svengali.CCL.oxz) are the two likely suspects, both of which have been upgraded (via the Library OXP). I'd only install those two OXP's if another OXP requires them.
You nailed it fine.
They are culprits, but
only when using
Ship Outfitting menu. Hitting F3 key twice and exiting game.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 6:18 pm
by commander_STyx2909
Got a question for OXPs masters.
Not every objects are available in the Shipyard Library, mostly "Miscellaneous" ones. What kind of plist properties are missing in the OXP adding such items? Asteroids are my main concern ATM and because there are not other model viewer available.
Thanks for your time.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:24 pm
by phkb
In order for a ship to be visible on the Ship Library, it needs to have a
demoships.plist file in the Config folder of the OXP.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 10:06 pm
by commander_STyx2909
phkb wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:24 pm
In order for a ship to be visible on the Ship Library, it needs to have a
demoships.plist file in the Config folder of the OXP.
Thank you very much!
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:05 pm
by commander_STyx2909
nope. At least, based upon the working example I found, I created two files in the OXP's Config folder.
This intended to display STAER9 iceteroids pack as I reworked a bit textures that looked like a bit too much clean ice to me and to decrease reflection as well. I will propose changes as an addon to this OXP.
But in a general way, I may look into implenting this in OXPs where it is missing with a "patch".
So far I don't know if the method you pointed is better, this one is working. Inspired from REDSPEAR's solo alt stations.
Code: Select all
//description.plist
{
"oolite-ship-library-category-alt_asteroid" = "ALT asteroid";
"oolite-ship-library-category-plural-alt_asteroid" = "ALT asteroids";
}
and
Code: Select all
//shiplibrary.plist
(
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_1";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 1";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_2";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 2";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_3";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 3";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_4";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 4";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_5";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 5";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_asteroid_6";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Asteroid 6";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_boulder_1";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Boulder 1";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_boulder_2";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Boulder 2";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_boulder_3";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Boulder 3";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
},
{
ship = "staer9_boulder_4";
class = "alt_asteroid";
summary = "Boulder 4";
description = "Alternate asteroid without shader; by STAER9.";
}
)
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:26 pm
by montana05
phkb wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:24 pm
In order for a ship to be visible on the Ship Library, it needs to have a
demoships.plist file in the Config folder of the OXP.
As much as I know
demoships.plist is for startup, for
shiplibrary.plist you need an additional entry at
descriptions.plist only.
I would suggest keeping the standard categories if possible, the library could really slow down with a lot of entries. Btw. for viewing texture modifications
Gallery.oxp is doing a fine job as well.
Re: Argh, the joy of testing OXPs
Posted: Wed Dec 30, 2020 12:52 pm
by commander_STyx2909
montana05 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 11:26 pm
phkb wrote: ↑Tue Dec 29, 2020 9:24 pm
In order for a ship to be visible on the Ship Library, it needs to have a
demoships.plist file in the Config folder of the OXP.
As much as I know
demoships.plist is for startup, for
shiplibrary.plist you need an additional entry at
descriptions.plist only.
I would suggest keeping the standard categories if possible, the library could really slow down with a lot of entries. Btw. for viewing texture modifications
Gallery.oxp is doing a fine job as well.
Neat. Thank you.