Schlongs of Skyrim SE

[MRGBHC]

9 hours ago, kansas72 said:

Yes.  I removed the sos.dll from plugins folder.  Then used one of the sos.dll from SOS AE.  If you are using AE that is.

I do apologize if this has been discussed, but does this trick work for the se build that is just one update away from being ae?

[Satarack]

So after replacing the old SOS dll directly with the new SOS AE dll worked I got SOS working.  I tried using it as a separate mod overwriting SOS, which others seemed to indicate would work, but it didn't work for me and CTD from the loading screen.

 

The SOS racemenu wasn't working, and the SOSRaceMenu.eso plugin disables the option to use the MCM to change your own schlong rank.  Disabling the plugin (which lets you once again use the MCM to change schlong rank) was causing CTD on loading screen of existing characters but worked if it was disabled before starting a new game.

[mikepros]

Is there a way to make the new patch dll work on current save? It seems to only work on new saves after you replaced it.

[kansas72]

@MRGBHC   This new one SOS AE is probably only for AE.  Im not sure if it would work for the "regular" se.  You should be able to use the normal SOS for SE.  My setup worked fine before AE.   So far AE version is working pretty good.  Modders have been really good on updating or upgrading mods to work with AE.

[kansas72]

@satarack  If you installed xp32, did you select "none" or did you select RaceMenu?

[kansas72]

@mikepros   It could be why I was having issues too.  I had to start new game and it worked good.  

[mikepros]

1 minute ago, kansas72 said:

@mikepros   It could be why I was having issues too.  I had to start new game and it worked good.  

yeah that was stated form the dll patch creator. I'm saying if there is  a way to patch it so it works on an existing save .

[SadEyes]

28 minutes ago, mikepros said:

yeah that was stated form the dll patch creator. I'm saying if there is  a way to patch it so it works on an existing save .

I managed to do it, albeit with an older save. I installed SOS with the "old" .dll file, I then loaded a save from before the SE AE-update and saved again. Then I just switched the SOS dll-file with the AE version, and it worked.

[chuckseven1]

3 hours ago, mikepros said:

yeah that was stated form the dll patch creator. I'm saying if there is  a way to patch it so it works on an existing save .

The cosave formats are incompatible. The only way to use it on an existing save is to get SKSE to drop all the SOS cosave data and then my DLL will start fresh. You will lose the SOS specific data but nothing else. This is what the workarounds people are posting do. I cannot create a patch because I do not have the source for the original DLL.

[4nk8r]

I'm curious.  Of all the people having DLL issues...how many of you are MO2 users?

[swmas]

4 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

I'm curious.  Of all the people having DLL issues...how many of you are MO2 users?

Really Queen?

[4nk8r]

2 minutes ago, swmas said:

Really Queen?

What?  If you think I'm disparaging MO2, you should back off your soapbox.  Nothing of the kind.

Edited December 2, 2021 by 4nk8r

[swmas]

2 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

What?

Are you really gonna insinuate it's MO's fault?

[4nk8r]

2 minutes ago, swmas said:

Are you really gonna insinuate it's MO's fault?

 

Not at all.  Enduser education is my point.  Seems like there is some extra step needed to get DLLs to install correctly, and most many that come here don't know about it.

Edited December 2, 2021 by 4nk8r

[swmas]

3 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

 

Not at all.  Enduser education is my point.  Seems like there is some extra step needed to get DLLs to install correctly, and most users don't know about it.

You only copy and paste the Dll in a folder with MO and MO loads it in the game while Vortex spams your game folder with simlinks, creating and deleting simlinks whenever you change something in the load order, I wonder which method is more prone to fail.

[4nk8r]

8 minutes ago, swmas said:

You only copy and paste the Dll in a folder with MO and MO loads it in the game while Vortex spams your game folder with simlinks, creating and deleting simlinks whenever you change something in the load order, I wonder which method is more prone to fail.

 

Like I said, I'm not trying to disparage MO2, so you should take your rhetoric somewhere else.  In my time watching and trying to help people, a frequent reoccurring theme seems to be DLL issues and the users are using MO2.

 

Edit: I'm honestly curious what this overlooked step is.  I'm not an MO2 user, so I don't know what to tell people when they encounter this issue, and competent MO2 users seldom seem to speak up to correct these users.  So, what are they forgetting?

Edited December 2, 2021 by 4nk8r

[swmas]

13 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

 

Like I said, I'm not trying to disparage MO2, so you should take your rhetoric somewhere else.  In my time watching and trying to help people, a frequent reoccurring theme seems to be DLL issues and the users are using MO2.

 

Edit: I'm honestly curious what this overlooked step is.  I'm not an MO2 user, so I don't know what to tell people when they encounter this issue, and competent MO2 users seldom seem to speak up to correct these users.  So, what are they forgetting?

The only thing I can think of is the DLL does something that makes the antivirus shit itself and interfere with MO when creating the virtual file system. You can't go wrong with installing mods with MO, the mod is either installed correctly or it does nothing.

[4nk8r]

7 minutes ago, swmas said:

The only thing I can think of is the DLL does something that makes the antivirus shit itself and interfere with MO when creating the virtual file system. You can't go wrong with installing mods with MO, the mod is either installed correctly or it does nothing.

 

I'm not arguing, but I'd expect the same kind of behavior in NMM or Vortex if it were AV related.  I'd honestly expect MO2's abstraction would insulate the AV's behavior more than in those using other mod managers.

[4nk8r]

26 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

Vortex spams your game folder with simlinks

Hardlinks.  Not quite the same thing, but the quick succession of link creation steps certainly introduces more chances for failure, if any exists.  Hardlinks are the equivalent of the full file being placed there, but the difference is that there are now more than 1 file handles defined for the same set of data.  Like 2+ filenames that point to the same data.  If you delete 1, the data is still accessible via the remaining hardlinks.  If you had 1 file with 99 additional hardlinks (has to be the same partition for hardlinks to work), you could delete the file 99 times and still have 1 copy left accessible.  Early versions of Windows might have called this crosslinked sectors, except in the case of hardlinks, the crosslinking is done only in the file table.

 

With symlinks (short for symbolic links), the other links are just pointers to the original file.  Should the hardlink to the original data be deleted, the symlink is still there but no longer attached to the data.  Symlinks can cross partition barriers, but aren't robust at all in regards to data integrity.

[swmas]

4 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

 

I'm not arguing, but I'd expect the same kind of behavior in NMM or Vortex if it were AV related.  I'd honestly expect MO2's abstraction would insulate the AV's behavior more than in those using other mod managers.

I don't think so, MO2 has to create the USVFS which might get hanged by the antivirus when the DLL is accessed and maybe corrupt something? I'm conjecturing cause I don't know how antiviruses or the MO's VFS works.

That being said I haven't had any problems with Dll mods on MO that's why I think it depends on each user's environment and a shitty antivirus is what came to mind.

[4nk8r]

2 minutes ago, swmas said:

I don't think so, MO2 has to create the USVFS which might get hanged by the antivirus when the DLL is accessed and maybe corrupt something? I'm conjecturing cause I don't know how antiviruses or the MO's VFS works.

That being said I haven't had any problems with Dll mods on MO that's why I think it depends on each user's environment and a shitty antivirus is what came to mind.

 

Do you know of a lean checklist for using MO2 for success in DLL installation?  Something that covers every mandatory step but doesn't delve to far into exposition and such?  I'd like to learn enough about it to be able to point other users in right direction without having to actually get 1st hand experience with it.

[swmas]

15 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

Hardlinks.  Not quite the same thing, but the quick succession of link creation steps certainly introduces more chances for failure, if any exists.  Hardlinks are the equivalent of the full file being placed there, but the difference is that there are now more than 1 file handles defined for the same set of data.  Like 2+ filenames that point to the same data.  If you delete 1, the data is still accessible via the remaining hardlinks.  If you had 1 file with 99 additional hardlinks (has to be the same partition for hardlinks to work), you could delete the file 99 times and still have 1 copy left accessible.  Early versions of Windows might have called this crosslinked sectors, except in the case of hardlinks, the crosslinking is done only in the file table.

 

With symlinks (short for symbolic links), the other links are just pointers to the original file.  Should the hardlink to the original data be deleted, the symlink is still there but no longer attached to the data.  Symlinks can cross partition barriers, but aren't robust at all in regards to data integrity.

It's still a nightmare for the storage. The NTFS file system has an index that remembers every file you had and deleted by name and it keeps growing until you format it. File systems also have a minimal file size that can sometimes be more than the actual file the hardlink links to so it would be more efficient to just move the original file instead of linking to it. All in all I think the linking method is retarded and I think even Wrye Bash is a better mod manager than Vortex.

Edited December 2, 2021 by swmas

[4nk8r]

3 minutes ago, swmas said:

It's still a nightmare for the storage. The NTFS file system has an index that remembers every file you had and deleted by name and it keeps growing until you format it. File systems also have a minimal file size that can sometimes be more than the actual file the hardlink links to so it would be more efficient to just move the original file instead of linking to it. All in all I think the linking method is retarded and I think even Wrye Bash is a better mod manager than Vortex.

 

Isn't WB more like NMM in deployment?  It just raw copies the file into the folder?  Can you point me to what you're talking about with NTFS?  I'd like to read more about that.

[swmas]

7 minutes ago, 4nk8r said:

 

Do you know of a lean checklist for using MO2 for success in DLL installation?  Something that covers every mandatory step but doesn't delve to far into exposition and such?  I'd like to learn enough about it to be able to point other users in right direction without having to actually get 1st hand experience with it.

I don't know what you expect, MO has a folder that can be anywhere, even on a flash drive and it stores every mod there. You can even put them there manually from windows explorer. You can install mods in MO even without MO running. Each mod is in it's own folder that is exactly like a stand alone version of Skyrim's "Data" folder and MO merges them together on launch.

[chuckseven1]

59 minutes ago, swmas said:

You only copy and paste the Dll in a folder with MO and MO loads it in the game while Vortex spams your game folder with simlinks, creating and deleting simlinks whenever you change something in the load order, I wonder which method is more prone to fail.

You shouldn't be copy pasting. The archive is a fomod installer. Just install it like any fomod.