Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image

Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is grass?:
What is the seventh word in this sentence?:
What is five minus two (use the full word)?:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Wisp
« on: February 09, 2012, 06:29:55 AM »

Okay, so maybe I should explain.
The "latest version" phordicus refers to is one I compiled because I needed a NI that worked on LInux. It includes this. Later, others also needed something that worked on Linux, so I posted my build in public.

I have found the problem. NI uses a map to hold the directory hierarchy. In this case a folder named "scripts" is added, but it tries to retrieve the folder named "Scripts". Hence nothing from "Scripts" et al. gets added to the list of resources.
Posted by: devSin
« on: February 08, 2012, 08:21:23 PM »

Quote from: phordicus on February 08, 2012, 07:16:07 PM
Since no one's updating the version numbers, is there some way to know whose version is available?  I'd like to skip these kinds of releases.
The old versions are still available from Jon's site (if it's still up).

His new codebase never made it out of beta. Any recent version is based off the newer codebase, however.

Because I don't remember changing anything that would affect this, and because Taimon and myself are the only people I'm aware of to have modified the source, I'm assuming this behavior existed in Jon's sources.

Which means you can either use one of the newer builds, or you can use on of the old "official" builds. Or you can use both. Whatever best suits your needs.
Posted by: phordicus
« on: February 08, 2012, 07:16:07 PM »

Quote from: Miloch on February 08, 2012, 09:03:58 AM
Except that it is there and it says funinj01.bam, because funinja01.bam wouldn't be a valid filename (> 8 chars). Not sure what you're saying.
What a weird pairing;  missing this

Quote
The pic shows an older NI.

yet catching an extra letter when the pic shows the obviously-referred-to file.

@devSin

It definitely changed in this last version.  NI would allow editing of files buried multiple folders deep in any of the standard overriding folders.  Since no one's updating the version numbers, is there some way to know whose version is available?  I'd like to skip these kinds of releases.
Posted by: devSin
« on: February 08, 2012, 04:17:03 PM »

It's possible we look only in Chitin.key (BIFF access) and the override folder when populating the list, although I'm not sure why we wouldn't hit also the other domains (I don't recall changing this, so it must have been something Jon did—he was actually rewriting NI, so it's dramatically different under-the-hood than older versions, even before we started poking it).
Posted by: Miloch
« on: February 08, 2012, 09:03:58 AM »

Except that it is there and it says funinj01.bam, because funinja01.bam wouldn't be a valid filename (> 8 chars). Not sure what you're saying.
Posted by: phordicus
« on: February 08, 2012, 03:46:38 AM »

The pic shows an older NI.  To visualize the problem, pretend funinja01.bam isn't in the dropdown on the edit side.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v283/phordicus/NI-reverted.jpg

Thanks.