How many commands can FLMM process?
-
most mods contain files instead of script commands. this is safer btw. it is unlikely that IGx89 planned to make the mod manager a modding&coding tool but an activation program copying most of the files. the data tag feature is probably implemented for not to waste too much hard disc space when you change about 5 lines of a 5000 line file. FLMM is supposed to backup, copy and delete, not to make all the changes itself.
-
Hey,
well… I’ve recently found the original code from 1.4 beta 4 on my old HDD (which I’m using atm).
I think it would be worth to restart the FLMM 1.5 project by not adding new features but by fixing the 1.4 bugs (cause I still dunno why most ppl are still using FLMM 1.31)Cheers,
Crazy -
Crazy wrote:
Hey,well… I’ve recently found the original code from 1.4 beta 4 on my old HDD (which I’m using atm).
I think it would be worth to restart the FLMM 1.5 project by not adding new features but by fixing the 1.4 bugs (cause I still dunno why most ppl are still using FLMM 1.31)Cheers,
CrazySupposedly it is less stabile. It was reported that it didn’t always clean up added files, and i must say that I once noticed that too. But now, in my ‘second modding life’, I haven’t experienced it.
The cool thing about 1.4 is that it can create mutliple ids_info’s on the same line, enabling you to use XML to generate the proper base info into InfocardMap.ini. 1.31 Couldn’t do that.
I would welcome a FLMM 1.5!!! (as long as it keeps the multidple ids_info functionality) It might, to get back to the OP, be convenient to have the max number of commands it can process as a modifyable value in the GUI…
-
Gisteron wrote:
FLMM is supposed to backup, copy and delete, not to make all the changes itself.
As longs as it works, it would seem fine to me. Besides, I think it’s more convenient and more elegant to use FLMM this way.
A hypothetical distributional version of a mod created this way, need not be in this format: the modder would just need to copy all the modified files into a new folder and add a script.xml to it.
-
adoxa wrote:
Yes, there is a limit of 2000 resources (each, I think). There’s still no sign if Crazy has got back access to his source, so FLMM development is in limbo. If you’d like to risk it, I have found where it tests the limit, but I don’t know if just increasing it will work. You’ll need upx (or equivalent) to unpack it first, then go to offset 0x27D23 and replace the 2000i (D0 07 00 00) with whatever. To be complete, you might also want to go to 0x7672D and change the string (maximum of 99999 in that case).Edit: The 1.4beta4 offsets are 0x24E95 & 0x72EC5.
Thanks!! I’m gonna try that out.
I assume I don’t need to “re-pack” it, right?
-
ouch! tripple posting… whatever
moonhead, there is a FLMM 1.5 already though it is yet a beta and not required by any mod we know (that deserves the name yet being a two-weaps-expansion like the pre-installed minimods of FLMM). i used it several times before i recognised that there is nothing that needs it. what i heard of it is however that it is for now more buggy than 1.4 but as it was released recently it is likely that the development is actually going on even if we are not informed properly about it. -
Crazy wrote:
I think it would be worth to restart the FLMM 1.5 project by not adding new features but by fixing the 1.4 bugs (cause I still dunno why most ppl are still using FLMM 1.31)I completely agree, Crazy. An issue-free version of FLMM would be terrific for the community. It would be the best thing since… well… FLMM.
In the Issues Department (not new features):
In addition to generating two IDs on one line, there are times when it is necessary to use the same ID in more than one INI file.
InfoCardMaps is also an example of this issue.
Regarding issues with making reliable backups, one alternative would be to simply backup and restore the Freelancer tree. It would not be dramatically slower than the current system when used with complex mods. Many people already do this manually. If FLMM is going to attempt to make backups, then it might as well make backups that really work.
-
Bullwinkle wrote:
Crazy wrote:
In the Issues Department (not new features):
In addition to generating two IDs on one line, there are times when it is necessary to use the same ID in more than one INI file.
InfoCardMaps is also an example of this issue.
FLMM 1.4 does assign the same number to identical multiple instances of ids_names and ids_infos! Without this, there would indeed be no point in managing InfoCardMap.ini thru FLMM XML scripting.
-
Btw, here is an example of how I’m organizing stuff. Argh’s Toolkit was a big example (although I didn’t care much for what seemed Argh’s one true passion: his ship handling modifications)
-
Moonhead wrote:
FLMM 1.4 does assign the same number to identical multiple instances of ids_names and ids_infos!In the Deja Vu Department, I see that you made the same request, and received the same response, four years ago! (about using the same ID in multiple files)
I started to do the same thing as you with my data but stopped because of limitations in FLMM 1.31. Now you have me persuaded to pick it up again with 1.4.
Thanks for the tip, Moonhead. I’m a convert.
So you have been doing this for a while… what do you do about InfoCardMap?
PS: The FLMM Mod Guide (Help/How do I make a mod work with FLMM?) says that the limit is arbitrary, so adoxa’s offset may solve that problem.
Don’t forget that you will then have to distribute your customized version of FLMM with your mod… and maybe support problems that could be caused by changing a user’s FLMM.
.
-
Gisteron wrote:
you could store multiple xml’s in one file, that would probably make it simplier to overlook.That would be defeating the purpose.
Gisteron wrote:
kill me for this comment but this amount of xml based changes is just… weird…I can only agree on that :lol:
-
Bullwinkle wrote:
So you have been doing this for a while… what do you do about InfoCardMap?
Make sure the first ids_info in InfoCardMap.ini is identical to the one you use in the starsystem’s ini (and also, make sure there is no other base using an exactly identical text):
<data file="Data\Interface\InfocardMap.ini" method="append"><source> Map = 0;GENERATEXMLRES("<xml><rdl><push><text>CLASS: Cocoon</text><para><text>AMENITIES: Yes</text><para><text>POPULATION: 120</text><para></para></para></para></push></rdl></xml>"), 0;GENERATEXMLRES("<xml><rdl><push><text>Whatever Station.</text><para><para><text>In order to retain its geostationary orbit, the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog.</text><para></para></para></para></push></rdl></xml>")</data>from the file that writes the starsystem’s .ini :
; ;================================{ Whatever Station } ; [Object] nickname = Aa00_01 ids_name = 0;GENERATESTRRES("Whatever Station") pos = 0, 0, 80000 rotate = 0, 180, 0 Archetype = outpost ids_info = 0;GENERATEXMLRES("<xml><rdl><push><text>CLASS: cocoon</text><para><text>AMENITIES: Yes</text><para><text>POPULATION: 120</text><para></para></para></para></push></rdl></xml>") base = Aa00_01_base dock_with = Aa00_01_base voice = atc_leg_f01 space_costume = pl_female5_head, pi_order_female_body reputation = fc_or_grp behavior = NOTHING difficulty_level = 3 loadout = trading_outpost_co_03 pilot = pilot_solar_easy visit = 1I use one XML file for each base, containing all the stuff that makes up a base, to be written to:
-
Data\Interface\InfocardMap.ini
-
Data\Universe\Universe.ini
-
Data\Missions\mBases.ini
-
Data\Equipment\Market_Commodities.ini
-
Data\Equipment\Market_Misc.ini
-
Data\Equipment\Market_Ships.ini
Bullwinkle wrote:
Don’t forget that you will then have to distribute your customized version of FLMM with your mod… and maybe support problems that could be caused by changing a user’s FLMM.A distributed version of such a mod would preferablybe the files as installed, copied from the game folder when the XML plethora version is installed. So, in the distributed version, the XML scripting will be brought back to a minimum, and the mod can be sort of FLMM-version-independant.
-
-
OK, so you only make the first entry in InfoCardMap? I guess that makes sense, based on your request to Crazy.
And that is a fine solution for distribution.
This is really awesome, Moonhead. Not at all weird in a bad sense… just unique. Or uncommon, at least, because I see in the archived thread that Lancer Solurus does/did this, as well.
So what did you wind up doing about rumors? Comment out MiscText.dll from Freelancer.ini and replace it with your own IDs in script?
Maintaining rumors along with base, system, and markets would be awesome… it is so annoying to read bar rumors that are just plain wrong (because the IDs were copied from another system)!
Looking at your list, you have done a remarkable amount of work on this. Very cool.
(@Gisteron: Imagine a universe in which all ship infocards actually match ship specs because the original data is stored in a single XML script.
).
-
er, i don’t think single xml’s are needed for this. in early stages of my mod i made also every ship via xml (though due to bugs i stored the infocards in dlls and wrote the numbers into the xml’s as regular entries) and written stats are independant from actual stats. you can manipulate both to make them match less.
however, it is more sensible not to make multiple xml’s changing the same file but store all changes on one single file into one xml. this is just safer though organization and order are more complicated this way. besides if you get deeper into developing where it starts annoying you that you have to reactivate your mod each time to test single features, you will apply changes directly into backuped files within your FL directory (made them not read-only). in this case it is just faster and simplier to copy the changed files once they work as you wish it into your mods directory instead of remembering what xml you have to change to synchronize the two packages. trust me, you will come up to this once the changes have a certain amount of hard drive requirement. every copying, every deleting, every activation and deactivation stores useless cache files and the day will come when you will start to want to work around this as much as possible.
:D:D -
Sorry, Gisteron, I used a poor choice of words. I meant that a data-driven approach (using a single source of data) is both more elegant and more reliable than modifying INIs and DLLs separately. The advantage to a data-driven approach grows with the complexity of the mod. Nobody is suggesting putting an entire mod into a single script.
In fact, with multiple scripts, it is easy to separate one into a separate mod. In that case, activating is very quick during development.
I began working on an approach similar to Moonhead’s, but I used a separate mod for each script. I found that easier and quicker to keep organized, and it avoids the 2,000 item limit. I put only the header into script.xml to make it easy to merge or separate the mods.
I only paused that development because of the problem with assigning the same ID in multiple locations (which is now solved, thanks to Moonhead and FLMM 1.4). Now I can resume!
I find it much easier to keep my work organized this way than to keep track of all of the changes made to raw files.
.
-
Gisteron wrote:
if you get deeper into developing where it starts annoying you that you have to reactivate your mod each time to test single features, you will apply changes directly into backuped files within your FL directory (made them not read-only). in this case it is just faster and simplier to copy the changed files once they work as you wish it into your mods directory instead of remembering what xml you have to change to synchronize the two packagesWel, giving the XML files clear and proper names is essential. Besides, I can use the Windows Explorer search function (although this, unfortunately, does not work 100% as it should)
In addition, the files are as modular as they can be, meaning I could copy parts of the mod to a separate mod, and handle that as if it’s a standalone. That means, among other things, that I need to use stock factions when working on new systems, and only replace those by custom factions when I’m satisfied.
I admit it’s a lot of work, and there’s much to say against it. But it’s not like I’m not pushing this method upon you.
-
I just replied but my connection crashed :-x So if I might sound impatient in the following, you know why
Bullwinkle wrote:
OK, so you only make the first entry in InfoCardMap? I guess that makes sense, based on your request to Crazy.Yes, these are the kind of entries InfoCardMap.ini is meant for, right?
There is a pair of two ids_infos in InfoCardMap.ini , and the first of these should also be used in the base entry in the starsystem .ini file.
Bullwinkle wrote:
This is really awesome, Moonhead. Not at all weird in a bad sense… just unique. Or uncommon, at least, because I see in the archived thread that Lancer Solurus does/did this, as well.Well it’s a lot of work, and as long as i haven’t even finsihed the foundations, it’s a little early to celebrate this method. I might run into limitations, or into other nastiness i didn’t foresee, or just get demoralized and quit…
Bullwinkle wrote:
So what did you wind up doing about rumors? Comment out MiscText.dll from Freelancer.ini and replace it with your own IDs in script?
No need to comment out MiscText.dll. Besides wouldn’t that screw up many stock ids_names and ids_infos?
Haven’t really looked into rumours and news yet (since “I’m back”) but it’s possible to do that with XML. Note that the first character is cut off, so start with a space or a _ or an X, whatever.
Bullwinkle wrote:
Maintaining rumors along with base, system, and markets would be awesome…Yep. And it can be done.
There’s two things were XML created ids_names and _infos don’t work: Factions and Fields (Asteroids and Nebulas) because the game uses multiple occurences of these names at fixed intervals from each other (with small variations) in bribes and missions. So these still need to be done by hand, using FLED-Ids or a similar tool. You can add about 50 of each (50 factions and 50 fileds, more or less).
