prideslayer Posted February 13, 2014 Author Posted February 13, 2014 Ok. Hal, two different downloads will be required; one for 32bit users, one for 64bit. If I'm as clever as I like to think I am, I may be able to make fomm.exe a 32bit launcher (to preserve peoples existing shortcuts) that can launch the right real executable depending on what it finds. Problem: I'm never as clever as I believe I am. I'll try it anyway though. First I'll just spin up the 64bit standalone version and let interested parties try it out. Probably will be able to release that later today.
prideslayer Posted February 13, 2014 Author Posted February 13, 2014 Ah looks as though it should be workable for both in the same executable as long as the target is 'any'. I'll have to look through the code and see if I can understand why TTW is causing it problems. Edit: Project was set to x86 (32bit), not any. Rebuilt with any and it seems ok, testing a TTW install when it finishes downloading. I *should* be able to make TTW work fine on 32bit versions of windows as well, probably just the original FOMM code doing something stupid like trying to slurp the entire fomod file into memory.
Halstrom Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 Yeah, I'm on 64 bit myself, I just suspect 32bit is still pretty common for Fallout players even if they have 64bit machines running 32bit O/S
prideslayer Posted February 13, 2014 Author Posted February 13, 2014 Ok, I can't actually test this with TTW (don't have the DLC), or with a 32bit OS, so I'm attaching here. Let me know how it goes. Seems to be OK for me on 64bit Win7. Just extract it over the top of your existing fomm.exe, wherever you put it.
nyaalich Posted February 13, 2014 Posted February 13, 2014 I've got Win 7 64 and TTW, and I've been running things fine w/ your versions of FOMM, pride. I think the only TTW 64-bit catch is for installing the FOMODs that can be created during the file creation process for TTW. A manual install, and everything has been working find on my end.
prideslayer Posted February 14, 2014 Author Posted February 14, 2014 Well yeah, that's what I want to see tested.. installing "big" fomods. I suspect fomm is doing something stupid like loading up the entire file before passing it off to the zip/unzip dll or something along those lines.
prideslayer Posted February 14, 2014 Author Posted February 14, 2014 FYI I sent the "other" FOMM author (NiveusEverto) a PM @ nexus informing him of what I've been up to and inviting him to play along if he so desires. Maybe he'll pop in.
niveuseverto Posted February 14, 2014 Posted February 14, 2014 FYI I sent the "other" FOMM author (NiveusEverto) a PM @ nexus informing him of what I've been up to and inviting him to play along if he so desires. Maybe he'll pop in. /me summoned Greetings everyone. I've replied to prideslayer's PM on Nexus and decided to drop few lines here to bring some attention to my humble person =) I don't see any problems for collaborating, except we have **slightly** diverged patches for original FOMM (for example mine version has fixed NexusMods integration when prideslayers's have integration completely wiped out)... I'm open for discussion.
prideslayer Posted February 14, 2014 Author Posted February 14, 2014 Welcome! I'm up for getting the integration working again, but I'd like to add in support for other sites as well, like this one, moddb, modsreloaded.. basically any of them. I don't want to tie it strictly to nexus.
niveuseverto Posted February 14, 2014 Posted February 14, 2014 Welcome! I'm up for getting the integration working again, but I'd like to add in support for other sites as well, like this one, moddb, modsreloaded.. basically any of them. I don't want to tie it strictly to nexus. As do I I've already making some steps into spliting request/callback logic and site-dependant logic. I'm planning to release first (sketch) version of "Dynamic API" as I call it in a couple of days, right after updater (I got tired of Nexus' file upload micro management)
prideslayer Posted February 14, 2014 Author Posted February 14, 2014 Feel free to branch it on the git repo here, add your existing fixes and so on, and send pull requests as normal if you like. If there's some other method you'd prefer, I'm listening.
niveuseverto Posted February 14, 2014 Posted February 14, 2014 I'd prefer to keep it on GitHub, as it has good release mechanic, that I want to use as auto-update backend. Plus possible NexusMods restrictions to pointing this site.
prideslayer Posted February 14, 2014 Author Posted February 14, 2014 Ok, we can figure something out. Easy enough to push to multiple origins if nothing else.
Halstrom Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 Perhaps if the Nexus Integration thing is an optional check box, it's all good for me, of course I realise it may be a lot more complicated than that
blisst Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 if anyone's taking feature requests.. the 1 thing I liked about NMM was the "no to mod" option so my replacers didn't get overwritten constantly.. however I wasn't a fan of the implementation.. I'd prefer a lock mod option on the package manager where you can lock a mod so you get a warning "New mod" is attempting to overwrite files from "locked mod name". Would you like to allow this for: All files, Files of your choice, no files. And if you're really ambitious.. if you do the "files of your choice option" a comparison list of assets in 2 side by side panels with asset info displayed (date size, etc).. kind of like a a spreadsheet view with applicable sorting functions, so if you just want nif's or textures.. etc then you can highlight your selections easily. Anyway thanks all for your continued work.
niveuseverto Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 if anyone's taking feature requests.. the 1 thing I liked about NMM was the "no to mod" option so my replacers didn't get overwritten constantly.. however I wasn't a fan of the implementation.. I'd prefer a lock mod option on the package manager where you can lock a mod so you get a warning "New mod" is attempting to overwrite files from "locked mod name". Would you like to allow this for: All files, Files of your choice, no files. And if you're really ambitious.. if you do the "files of your choice option" a comparison list of assets in 2 side by side panels with asset info displayed (date size, etc).. kind of like a a spreadsheet view with applicable sorting functions, so if you just want nif's or textures.. etc then you can highlight your selections easily. Anyway thanks all for your continued work. This kind of feature will require a lot of work and rewriting. But it is interesting feature;
prideslayer Posted February 15, 2014 Author Posted February 15, 2014 blisst I entered your thoughts as two new tickets, one for the NMM way, one for a more advanced method with the locking. Anyone can do this for feature requests though I think you have to register on the gitlab to create issues. I'll ask Ashal if there's some way to allow anonymous issue submission with a captcha or something, I know most people don't want to register just to report a bug or request a feature. Iseue categorization would be nice too. Before I add any 'advanced' features like that though, I'd like to get the classes refactored enough that adding support for new games isn't the confusing spaghetti PITA it is now -- it's not just about different games, it makes adding features to existing game management easier as well. First though I'm going to see if I can get my head around whatever issue you 32bit users are having with the large mod installs. Since that 64bit/32bit test version, nobody has reported in if it's working with TTW for them or not, so I don't know if it solved the problem.
ChianasGeek Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 Maybe start a new thread with title something like "Calling 32-bit users, testing needed!" ??
prideslayer Posted February 15, 2014 Author Posted February 15, 2014 I can test it myself with a custom 32bit build. I just kinda thought people reporting the problem would be more willing to step up and report details and test fixes.
niveuseverto Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 I can test it myself with a custom 32bit build. I just kinda thought people reporting the problem would be more willing to step up and report details and test fixes. Here goes sad thing, that you cut off the Trace configuration AFAIK Fomm creates Cache (archive with only fomod directory) when mod is loaded into package manager, but still access full archive everytime mod is loaded. I have this on my todo at later dates. I think I will be able to merge next week and we will be move in one stream.
prideslayer Posted February 15, 2014 Author Posted February 15, 2014 That trace thing bugged me to no end, to be honest. There is/was no reason to have it as a separate build + define rather than just an option that can be turned on/off. In any case, testing now with a 32bit build on a 10G mod, will see if that does the trick. If not I'll try making fake esp's and esm's to fool the TTW installer into thinking I have all the DLC.
prideslayer Posted February 15, 2014 Author Posted February 15, 2014 annnnnd got it. Out of memory in Archive.cs. Should have it fixed shortly.
niveuseverto Posted February 15, 2014 Posted February 15, 2014 annnnnd got it. Out of memory in Archive.cs. Should have it fixed shortly. If you can, please send me diff (or tag commit with this fix). BTW we'll need to rewrite mod applying and archive management. It has huge performance issues.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now