Fate/Stay Night [Realta Nua] - Ultimate Edition (thread discontinued, see OP for new thread)

[Jacktheinfinite101]

It indicated next to the patch name when there is an update. However, there are currently no updates at this time. At least that is what the installer thinks because the version numbers are all still 0.9.0 lol.

Weren't you the one who told me that we shouldn't change the version number?

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, how does that work? It doesn't think there's an update because the current installer has the same version number as the last? Why would it be set up that way? Wasn't the point so people could get updates whenever I posted them without me having to tell them to download new versions of the installer again?

[TheUnknownIdentity]

Weren't you the one who told me that we shouldn't change the version number?

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, how does that work? It doesn't think there's an update because the current installer has the same version number as the last? Why would it be set up that way? Wasn't the point so people could get updates whenever I posted them without me having to tell them to download new versions of the installer again?

I don't remember why I said not to, it may have been a testing thing. As the installer downloads the patches it adds that patches information to a json file in the installation directory. It then compares that version with what is in your uploaded json file the next time the installer is run to see if an update is available. If it is the same or somehow newer than what it updated it will not redownload the patch. Users can opt out of updating a patch by unchecking it when there is *update* next to the patch name.

[Jacktheinfinite101]

I don't remember why I said not to, it may have been a testing thing. As the installer downloads the patches it adds that patches information to a json file in the installation directory. It then compares that version with what is in your uploaded json file the next time the installer is run to see if an update is available. If it is the same or somehow newer than what it updated it will not redownload the patch. Users can opt out of updating a patch by unchecking it when there is *update* next to the patch name.

Okay so basically every time I make an update I need to reupload the json file with the information updated? Do I also need to increase the version number every time too?

[TheUnknownIdentity]

Okay so basically every time I make an update I need to reupload the json file with the information updated? Do I also need to increase the version number every time too?

Yes, but only increase the version number for patches that have been updated. Also, I'm adding detection for a corrupted/non-existant json file. It will just tell the user an update is available even if one is not as it will fix/create the version info json file. I'm also going to set the installer version to 0.9.2 so anyone who has already downloaded the installer will receive an installer update prompt. I'll pm you when my links are updated.

[NM64]

Just check everything you have installed and let it redownload them. From there there wont be an issue.

I already did that, and it doesn't re-download anything... I even humored myself and unchecked and then re-checked everything but the installer sees no difference. For reference I typically test by either flat-out deleting patch.xp3 or replacing it with a version dated Jan.23 or earlier.


Also, um, is there a particular reason to package the 32bit and 64bit installers as separate downloads? The only legitimate reason I can think of is that you want to use ZIP (rather than RAR or 7z) for maximum compatibility and therefore putting both versions in a single 7z archive or the like was never even considered a possibility. (for reference, the 64bit ZIP download is 87.6MB while putting both the 64bit and 32bit installer into a maxed-out-settings compressed 7z archive gave me 86.8MB)

...though one could have used a self-extracting 7z archive or the like, but at that point it might as well work like other installers do in that it extracts to a temporary location and then automatically runs said installer, and then after completing the installer the temporary extracted files are deleted (I know that the .NET installer does this).

I have a long ass elitist textwall on my personal reasons why I don't use [widescreen] just waiting to post here later

You know, while I was poking around in the patch_menu.tjs file, I couldn't help but notice that it looks like there's a separate function for cropping the images and stuff that is currently forced to "enable" when widescreen is active...I don't suppose it'd be possible to expose that option and be able to have a widescreen text box and stuff while still having non-widescreen imagery?

[TheUnknownIdentity]

I already did that, and it doesn't re-download anything... I even humored myself and unchecked and then re-checked everything but the installer sees no difference. For reference I typically test by either flat-out deleting patch.xp3 or replacing it with a version dated Jan.23 or earlier.


Also, um, is there a particular reason to package the 32bit and 64bit installers as separate downloads? The only legitimate reason I can think of is that you want to use ZIP (rather than RAR or 7z) for maximum compatibility and therefore putting both versions in a single 7z archive or the like was never even considered a possibility. (for reference, the 64bit ZIP download is 87.6MB while putting both the 64bit and 32bit installer into a maxed-out-settings compressed 7z archive gave me 86.8MB)

...though one could have used a self-extracting 7z archive or the like, but at that point it might as well work like other installers do in that it extracts to a temporary location and then automatically runs said installer, and then after completing the installer the temporary extracted files are deleted (I know that the .NET installer does this).






You know, while I was poking around in the patch_menu.tjs file, I couldn't help but notice that it looks like there's a separate function for cropping the images and stuff that is currently forced to "enable" when widescreen is active...I don't suppose it'd be possible to expose that option and be able to have a widescreen text box and stuff while still having non-widescreen imagery?

tbh I didn't originally realize that the uninstaller was already inside the installer so I had both the installer and uninstaller in an archive. I also figured it better to archive them as some antiviruses freak out when you try to download an exe file. The reason I'm using zip instead of rar or 7z is because the module used to extract the zip format is already in the standard library so no additional code was needed to be added for it.

[NM64]

Turns out you have to delete the "patches.json" file in order for the installer to actually go into "install" mode rather than "update" mode even when selecting an existing installation directory, when will then allow you to successfully download new patches and the like.

...though being in "install" mode, it ends up re-downloading everything even when only a single patch is missing or outdated.

The reason I'm using zip instead of rar or 7z is because the module used to extract the zip format is already in the standard library so no additional code was needed to be added for it.

Wut.

So that was kind of Greek to me, but from my understanding this should only matter if there are other files in the ZIP archive...which there are not. So am I misunderstanding something here?

[TheUnknownIdentity]

Turns out you have to delete the "patches.json" file in order for the installer to actually go into "install" mode rather than "update" mode even when selecting an existing installation directory, when will then allow you to successfully download new patches and the like.

...though being in "install" mode, it ends up re-downloading everything even when only a single patch is missing or outdated.





Wut.

So that was kind of Greek to me, but from my understanding this should only matter if there are other files in the ZIP archive...which there are not. So am I misunderstanding something here?

Basically the code to handle the zip format was already in the installer so I chose to use that format instead of adding more code.

The reason it isn't updating the patches is because the version numbers weren't changed due to a miscommunication between Jack and I.

[NM64]

Basically the code to handle the zip format was already in the installer so I chose to use that format instead of adding more code.

I see.

...but I still don't understand why that would even make a difference between whether to use ZIP, RAR, 7z, etc for the current installer since it is literally nothing but a single EXE file in an archive by itself, so even running said EXE "directly" from the archive is just going to result in the file being temporarily extracted anyway which would normally break things if it relied on other files located in said ZIP, but the EXE is literally the only file present in the ZIP, so...what difference does it make?

[TheUnknownIdentity]

I see.

...but I still don't understand why that would even make a difference between whether to use ZIP, RAR, 7z, etc for the current installer since it is literally nothing but a single EXE file in an archive by itself, so even running said EXE "directly" from the archive is just going to result in the file being temporarily extracted anyway which would normally break things if it relied on other files located in said ZIP, but the EXE is literally the only file present in the ZIP, so...what difference does it make?

So which is preferred, placing both in one archive or just both exes separate? If it is to be changed now is the best time to do so.

[Jacktheinfinite101]

You know, while I was poking around in the patch_menu.tjs file, I couldn't help but notice that it looks like there's a separate function for cropping the images and stuff that is currently forced to "enable" when widescreen is active...I don't suppose it'd be possible to expose that option and be able to have a widescreen text box and stuff while still having non-widescreen imagery?

That would totally keep it so the sprites were placed according to widescreen logic though (I'd assume) so we'd see characters leaving the borders of the screen.

- - - Updated - - -

Turns out you have to delete the "patches.json" file in order for the installer to actually go into "install" mode rather than "update" mode even when selecting an existing installation directory, when will then allow you to successfully download new patches and the like.

...though being in "install" mode, it ends up re-downloading everything even when only a single patch is missing or outdated.

I bear some of the blame here as the installer is checking a json file on my Google Drive and I never realized I have to update the version numbers on that file each time I update them, hence the cause of our update mode being borked.

Since this issue would only affect us this time and the direct DL links still exist I won't update the json file now but I will next time we update.

[TheUnknownIdentity]

That would totally keep it so the sprites were placed according to widescreen logic though (I'd assume) so we'd see characters leaving the borders of the screen.

- - - Updated - - -



I bear some of the blame here as the installer is checking a json file on my Google Drive and I never realized I have to update the version numbers on that file each time I update them, hence the cause of our update mode being borked.

Since this issue would only affect us this time and the direct DL links still exist I won't update the json file now but I will next time we update.

I did fix an oversight in the installer though. What should be done about the archiving and whatnot?

[Jacktheinfinite101]

I did fix an oversight in the installer though. What should be done about the archiving and whatnot?

I'm fine with Nintendo Maniac's idea.

[TheUnknownIdentity]

Ok so @NM64, which option is better?

...ok this site doesn't have that feature I guess lol

[Jacktheinfinite101]

Ok so @NM64, which option is better?

Wait did I miss something? I thought he proposed the .7z packing of both into one. That's the idea I was referring to.

[NM64]

I'll make another change to test it again today but it seems to only update once, period, and never do so again regardless of if I update the files or not.

I did fix an oversight in the installer though.

Sounds like it's time for a v0.9.1.1 then. Besides, we need that "alpha" text label for widescreen, no?

(for reference of my OCD, I personally liked having it labeled as "[ALPHA] Wide" without quotes, but most notably with two spaces rather than one between the closing bracket and the capital W - BL's formatting strips out double-spaces however so I can't properly demonstrate it on here)

EDIT: Another alternative idea to the "alpha" label could be to use a "WIP" label instead if that makes Quibi feel better.

Ok so @NM64, which option is better?

Well neither way is really objectively "better" and so it really down to subjective-ness.


The current way with ZIP has better out-of-the-box OS compatibility.

My proposed 7z way allows a user to get copies of both the 64bit and 32bit versions in half the time...but the only time someone should really need both is when doing tests and stuff.



Really I was just thinking that having both inside a single archive would simplify things on our side to only have a single download file and a single download link, especially since we already had some derpiness with the 64bit installer download last night.

[Jacktheinfinite101]

Really I was just thinking that having both inside a single archive would simplify things on our side to only have a single download file and a single download link, especially since we already had some derpiness with the 64bit installer download last night.

I agree (though it should be noted we would have had that problem regardless)

Also yes I'll go with WIP, because I kinda agree that Alpha doesn't sound right to me.

[TheUnknownIdentity]

Sounds like it's time for a v0.9.1.1 then. Besides, we need that "alpha" text label for widescreen, no?

(for reference of my OCD, I personally liked having it labeled as "[ALPHA] Wide" without quotes, but most notably with two spaces rather than one between the closing bracket and the capital W - BL's formatting strips out double-spaces however so I can't properly demonstrate it on here)

EDIT: Another alternative idea to the "alpha" label could be to use a "WIP" label instead if that makes Quibi feel better.





Well neither way is really objectively "better" and so it really down to subjective-ness.


The current way with ZIP has better out-of-the-box OS compatibility.

My proposed 7z way allows a user to get copies of both the 64bit and 32bit versions in half the time...but the only time someone should really need both is when doing tests and stuff.



Really I was just thinking that having both inside a single archive would simplify things on our side to only have a single download file and a single download link, especially since we already had some derpiness with the 64bit installer download last night.

Ok. Also the way I setup the version control in the installer will handle 0.9.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 without an issue so we don't have to worry about how many iterations there are before the final 'non alpha' release.

[NM64]

I agree (though it should be noted we would have had that problem regardless).

I would think it'd still have been easier to catch and/or notice since all attention would be put onto one single thing.

Also it doesn't have to be a 7z archive, though from my testing the smallest I could get it in a RAR was 94MB (even with a 256MB dictionary) while I got it down to 86MB with 7z (which is 1MB smaller than the current 64bit ZIP by itself), but I did have to manually change the default "Ultra" preset to use at least a 96MB dictionary size in order to achieve that file size (with the default "Ultra" preset's 64MB dictionary size the resulting archive was 93MB).

I'm pretty sure 7zip's compression algorithm is extremely good at compressing files that are largely similar to one-another, so this win in 7zip's favor makes sense.

Also yes I'll go with WIP, because I kinda agree that Alpha doesn't sound right to me.

Also considering how much more widely the term "beta" is used, I'm actually kind of paranoid that some people might not actually understand what "alpha" means.

Oh and to clarify my OCD-ness regarding having two spaces, I personally found that the UI text spacing made single spaces have a narrower gap than I would typically expect in normal text (like in the text on this very BL forum post).

[TheUnknownIdentity]

If shutil can handle 7z out of the box I will change it to that.

Unfortunately after this round of fixes the 'installer update' feature wont work for anyone who has downloaded the 'new' installer that was put out today.

What were the exact setting in 7z you compressed them with? The smallest I can get them together is 160Mb