OrbWeaver
-
Posts
8725 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
81
Posts posted by OrbWeaver
-
-
21 hours ago, nbohr1more said:
The problem is that most TDM contributors would strongly object to allowing their work to be used by 3rd party commercial projects
It's much simpler than that: TDM includes numerous 3rd-party assets which forbid commercial usage. Even if every single team member approved of a license change, it would still not be possible without identifying and removing all of those 3rd-party assets (and any derived assets based on them) and replacing them with free alternatives.
21 hours ago, nbohr1more said:Debian and other similar distros need an easy way to allow users to install projects that are strictly non-commercial rather than forcing all open projects to permit 3rd parties to resell their work.
They do. There are numerous easy ways to obtain and install non-FOSS projects on Debian. You can download and extract a tarball, run a dedicated installer, add a custom PPA from Ubuntu or some other source, install an AppImage, or install a FlatPak. You can even install non-FOSS projects directly from Debian using the non-free repository. At no point do they "force" anyone to do anything.
What they don't allow is adding non-FOSS or otherwise restricted content into the main Debian repository, which is their right as a free software project.
-
1 hour ago, Fiver said:
That's why I asked about the possibilities for option (2) as well: Debian may accept a "TDM-libre" version containing the game engine, a libre mission,
I'm fairly sure they would accept this, if such a package could be produced.
1 hour ago, Fiver said:and a built-in downloader functionality for the 2.3 GB of non-libre game data.
They might accept this, but I'm not sure. If it's an installer that allows users to pick and choose optional packages, some of which may be non-free, this would probably be OK — in fact this is pretty much how the in-game mission downloader works. If it's a single installer that just "makes the rest of the game work", this might be seen as trying to evade the free software guidelines by indirectly packaging non-free content in an otherwise-free package. It might be necessary instead to package all of the non-free content in a separate DEB and put it into the non-free repository as an optional (Suggested/Recommended) extra.
1 hour ago, Fiver said:Some software and games, e.g. SuperTuxKart, stores user data (addon tracks, screenshots, et.c.) into a sub-directory of the user's home directory ("~/.local/Share/supertuxkart"). Could TDM be modified to use a similar writable directory under the user's home where writing is necessary (missions, settings, savegames, et.c.), a directory that the system-wide installation will then use instead?
Yes, this is the correct way to do things on Linux, and indeed how vanilla Doom 3 worked. In my opinion it would be much better if the Linux build of TDM worked like this, but I don't know how much work would be required to move away from the "everything in one writable directory" model that has been fairly solidly baked into the game implementation for many years.
-
1
-
-
14 minutes ago, datiswous said:
TDM should contain 2 storages, one that is gpl (the engine) and one with another or more than one license (content), maybe that's already the case? Via the installer you should be able to only install the gpl content? I don't know if that's possible. Everything pure code is gpl, or not? I mean everything outside of media files (images, video's, sound files, etc.).
In theory that should be possible, and I believe (although again, I'm not an authority on Debian policy) that it would permit inclusion in Debian, because the GPL parts could be in the main repository and the non-free parts could be in the dedicated non-free repository. I suspect they wouldn't accept the main package if it didn't contain some minimal playable content (which is basically what the OP is suggesting).
But as others have said, separating out the various free vs non-free components would be a huge task. I believe there are also problems with trying to have the game installed in a non-writable system-wide location, because they game expects to be extracted into a writable directory and store its data locally.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, stgatilov said:
First some people come saying the license of TDM is too free and blocks using TDM in commercial projects.
Then other people come and say the license is not free enough
(seriously, I wonder why).
Because people don't understand that "freedom" is not a scalar quantity, and talking about "more free" or "less free" is just meaningless nonsense. A license itself is not "free", but it can try to protect freedoms for specific groups of people (users, developers, company owners, etc), some of which might directly conflict with the freedoms of other specific groups of people.
-
3
-
-
4 hours ago, Fiver said:
Does anyone know why?
I'm not a Debian developer so I can only guess why, but I'm pretty sure the Debian packaging rules do not allow a package to include just an installer which downloads content, because it bypasses the whole packaging system. Debian (and RPM) packages are supposed to contain the software, so that they can correctly track its installed files, clean it up after removal, etc. Having the software managed by an installer makes any tracking by the packaging system impossible, and defeats the point of using a package in the first place (you might as well just download and run the installer yourself).
QuoteA browser like Chromium or Firefox qualifies as libre but can be used to view and download non-libre content.
That's not even a remotely valid comparison. A browser does not require downloaded non-free content in order to perform its function as a web browser. TDM will not work without the 2.3 GB of non-free (according to Debian free software guidelines) content. That content is an integral and necessary part of TDM, it's not just some remote web page that you are "viewing" with the TDM installer.
Whether the DEB package contains the entire content or just a downloader which installs the content doesn't make any difference to the licensing aspects.
-
On 1/19/2024 at 11:26 PM, Skaruts said:
Another benefit is that the sound will play the same everywhere, while speakers only get louder based on proximity. Speakers are usually more suited for crickets, dog sounds, tavern sounds, running water, steam leaks, etc.
Speakers only get louder or quieter while you are between the inner and outer sound radius. Once you are within the inner radius, the volume is constant. It is entirely possible to cover a large map area with a single omnidirectional speaker playing ambient music with a large inner radius which ensures a constant volume.
However there may be other advantages to using zone-based ambients (such as the ability to adjust the volume in settings, as you mentioned).
-
21 hours ago, snatcher said:
The Name of the Rose.
Is that the one with the really confusing labyrinthine library that nobody's allowed to go into? I always thought that would make an excellent (part of a) Dark Mod mission.
-
1
-
-
Not everyone is sensitive to (or can even detect) screen tearing — if you don't have a problem with it, and also don't have a problem with a noisy or overheating GPU rendering at too high a framerate (which could also be solved by capping the FPS, independently of VSync), leaving VSync off is perfectly fine.
-
The point of VSync is to reduce visual tearing caused by updating the frame halfway through a screen refresh while something is moving on screen, as well as reducing wasted GPU cycles rendering more frames than can be shown on screen (although some people like extremely high framerates for various other reasons).
However as far as I can recall, I've never seen the VSync settings in the game have any effect on Linux (and I use AMD cards, so I don't think this is specific to nVidia).
-
DarkRadiant does not care about engines at all, it only cares about file formats. Whether you can use DR with your Godot-based game will therefore depend on whether your game's assets are arranged in the same way as TDM.
More specifically:
- Your game will need to read map data from the Doom 3 .map format. If it does not, there will be no way to save your map from DarkRadiant in a form that your game can access. Export to OBJ is available but if all you want to do is produce OBJ models then DarkRadiant isn't the right tool for the job (you should use a proper 3D modelling app like Blender/Max/Maya/LightWave etc).
- Your game assets will need a tree of .def files defining important entities to be placed in your map, including certain "fixed" entity types which are used directly by DarkRadiant itself. There will need to be a light entity defining light volumes, a func_static entity defining a static model, an info_player_start entity to define the starting position, a speaker entity to define sound sources, and probably several others. If these entity types are not defined, then built-in features like "Create light" and "Place player start here" will not work correctly.
- Your game will need a tree of .mtr files defining material shaders, referring to image paths which will be resolved to either uncompressed .tga files in a textures/ hierarchy, or compressed DDS files in a dds/ hierarchy. If these material shaders are not defined, no materials will appear in DarkRadiant. DR does not make any attempt to load "raw" image file hierarchies which are not referred to by material shaders.
- Your game will need to define a hierarchy of 3D models in ASE or LWO format. No other formats will show up in the model selector. These models can be stored directly on disk (there is no "model shader" tree required like with materials).
-
1
-
On 12/23/2023 at 11:11 PM, peter_spy said:
Yeah, TTLG never had a great culture when it comes to copyrighted content, but BP is where things got somewhat ridiculous:
That's actually quite hilarious — using your credits to openly list all the unlicensed content you stole from other games.
I wonder if the modelling section of the credits says "Thanks to ThePirateBay for providing the cracked copy of 3DS Max we used for all our custom models".
-
2
-
-
That layout is possible. You need to:
- Drag the camera view and dock it at the bottom right.
- Drag the properties panel and dock it at the bottom left. This will leave a vertically split window, with the properties panel and camera view at the bottom, and a single wide XY window at the top.
- Choose View -> New XY View to create a new XY window, and drag this window to dock at the top right, leaving the default XY window at the left.
-
1
-
1
-
XYWnd.cpp no longer exists, it was renamed to OrthoView.cpp. The Visual Studio project will need to be updated to point to the new name otherwise it will try to compile a file which no longer exists.
-
If there are missing files reported, it's likely the .vcxproj needs to be updated with moved or renamed source files. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to do that (without guessing) because I only build on Linux which uses an entirely separate (CMake) build script.
I don't know the cause of the other errors but I would guess they are downstream consequences of not having all the required source files in the build script.
-
The old-style view layouts no longer exist since the UI has been converted to use fully customisable dock widgets for all major UI elements.
-
I think we'd need to see the mesh and the UV map as well, in order to properly diagnose this issue. But it's quite likely it is a clamping issue, as LDAsh suggests. I wouldn't be surprised if you have "clamp" in your MTR file.
Note that if your texture doesn't use an alpha channel (and it seems this image doesn't), DXT5 is just a waste of space compared to DXT1.
Also this image doesn't tile properly and won't look good as a texture even if you solve the clamping issue.
-
On 5/11/2023 at 9:19 PM, Zerg Rush said:
Yes, I'm familiar with this sort of junk-science "analysis" assembled by journalists or random tech companies counting stuff in a database and using it to form some kind of conclusion.
Side note: one of the dumbest articles I ever read was some lazy tech journalist trying to decide which Steam games were popular based entirely on the average total play time (in hours and minutes). He concluded that everybody hated "HL2: The Lost Coast" because the average play time was about 15 minutes, without bothering to check that The Lost Coast is actually a short tech demo that can be completed in a few minutes, so obviously people aren't going to rack up hundreds of hours playing it.
For example, consider these numbers:
QuoteAnd Debian, a flavor of Linux, was top of the table with 3,067 vulnerabilities over the last two decades. Reasonably close behind was Android on 2,563 vulnerabilities, with the Linux kernel in third place having racked up a count of 2,357. Apple’s macOS was only slightly behind that with 2,212, with Ubuntu in fifth place on 2,007.
So they count "Debian", which is an entire distro with thousands of packages, separately from "the Linux kernel" which is one component of a Linux system and already included in every other Linux distro. Does that mean the 2357 kernel vulnerabilities need to be subtracted from the 3067 Debian vulnerabilities, or have they already done that? Do the Debian vulnerabilities include only the kernel, core packages, or every package in the distribution (including Firefox, Thunderbird etc)? The article doesn't say, and the source data is not available since this is just a second-hand report of an "analysis" done by a random VPN company, not a proper scientific study.
In any case, comparing an entire Linux distro with just "Windows" isn't a valid comparison, because a Linux distro includes thousands of third-party packages. In order to make that a fair comparison you'd also need to include Microsoft Office and everything in the Microsoft store under the "Windows" heading.
QuoteAs for Microsoft’s operating systems, Windows 7 bore 1,283 vulnerabilities, and Windows 10 carried 1,111. If you add those together, you get a total of 2,394 for the past decade, roughly – given that Windows 7 came out in 2009, and handed the baton to Windows 10 in 2015.
I realise that everybody hated Windows 8, but I'm fairly sure that it didn't somehow magically vanish from history. And how do we know that it's valid to simply add together the number of vulnerabilities for Windows 7 and Windows 10? As far as I know Windows 10 wasn't re-written from scratch — many of those might be the exact same issues.
QuoteAlthough note that some of the other figures mentioned represent a full two decades of existence – like Debian, which has been around since 1993
So they're potentially including a full 16 years of extra vulnerabilities to Debian, by arbitrarily excluding all versions of Windows released before 2009, with absolutely no justification? This analysis is a complete joke.
Quoteso it’s difficult to make direct comparisons in that respect.
No shit, Sherlock.
QuoteStill, this serves to underline that Windows security is perhaps not as shaky as you might believe, at least historically, and indeed that Linux and Mac users shouldn’t be complacent.
They got something right at least. Nobody should be complacent about security, since all modern operating systems and software are affected by vulnerabilities, and need to be kept up-to-date with security patches.
-
4
-
-
On 5/5/2023 at 5:01 AM, Jnon said:
My Map menu looks like this. I'm running 3.8.0 on Ubuntu focal, installed from Matthew Mott's orbweaver PPA
You need to install the darkradiant-plugins-darkmod package.
-
On 4/27/2023 at 11:26 AM, Zerg Rush said:
Currently, although it may not seem like it, Windows is the most resistant OS against Viruses and Malware
I never realised Bill Gates was a member of these forums. Welcome to the community! I hope you enjoy The Dark Mod. Perhaps your Foundation could help pay for the server hosting or fund the development of some new features?
-
1
-
2
-
-
On 4/22/2023 at 4:42 PM, stgatilov said:
I guess footstep sounds are played from within source code.
So their volume can only be changed there without information loss.There are already many cvars about that, but a brief glance shows that perhaps they are ignored...
That's odd, because when I was working on the footsteps years ago, I was definitely adding volume decls to lower the volume of sounds. Perhaps something has changed since then regarding how the code interacts with sound shader keywords.
I do recall that there are problems with using sound shaders to increase volume, as others have reported, which is why it's a good idea to make sure your original sound files are fully normalised (volume maximised) before they go into the mod.
-
Oh I see, that's fine then (at least with regards to my concern about GUI duplication — I have no idea if the switch from text to xData would cause any other problems).
-
I'm not really up to speed on exactly what goes into an xData file, but do you mean that each readme would include its own copy of the scroll buttons and their required functionality? Because that's definitely the wrong solution to this particular problem from an engineering perspective.
If a readme is only intended to include text, then that's all that should appear in the file, not text plus a load of GUI boilerplate which will be identical in every readme and will probably just have to be copy-pasted from somewhere else. It should be up to the game engine to display the text in an appropriate way, including adding a scroll mechanism if it is needed.
-
On 4/8/2023 at 6:34 PM, Daft Mugi said:
@kin Here are more details about how I reduce footstep sound volumes.
I extract the footstep sounds from tdm_sound_sfx02.pk4.
While that may be an acceptable solution for you, it is the worst possible way to reduce the volume of sounds. You are introducing serial recompression artifacts for no benefit, and the process is unnecessarily cumbersome if you want to experiment with several different volume levels.
Instead, you should just edit (or add) the volume field in the respective .sndshd files, which changes the volume in-game without touching the sound files. For example, "volume -3" will make the sound approximately half as loud. This is a one-line change which is quick and easy to test and does not introduce any compression artifacts.
-
4
-
-
Language models are a mirror, reflecting the collected works of humanity back at us.
Some people look in that mirror, see their own reflection, and conclude "there is a artificial person behind this sheet of glass that looks and behaves exactly like me... our days as humans are numbered!". But it's not true. It's just a reflection. It can't create anything that humans couldn't (or haven't) created to begin with.
I have no doubt that one day, artificial human-like intelligence will exist, but it will require a lot more than just a language model remixing stuff on the internet. If you're a cargo cult programmer copy-pasting junk code off Stack Overflow, or a hack blog writer churning out articles with titles like "20 dumb things Trump has said", AI is coming for your job — but that's because your job wasn't worth anything to begin with.
libxml2 problem on Linux
in DarkRadiant Feedback and Development
Posted
For an as-yet unknown reason, this commit seems to break XML parsing on Linux:
#6439: Use xmlReadFile instead of xmlParseFile which has been deprecated and removed. Privatise Document() constructor accepting an xmlDocPtr.As far as I can see, the commit is entirely correct. xmlParseFile is indeed deprecated, and the new usage of xmlReadFile matches what the libxml2 examples are suggesting. But the result is that although the xmlDoc* returned from the function is not NULL, nothing XML-related works, the entire registry system returns only empty values, and almost all of the tests are broken (because the main radiant core cannot be initialised without any registry values available). Changing back to xmlParseFile makes the problem go away but is an unsatisfactory solution because it specifically reintroduces a deprecated function call.
I am not sure whether this is a bug in the specific version of libxml2 on my Ubuntu system, or something incorrect about how we are calling xmlReadFile (i.e. perhaps it requires an encoding or a particular non-default option to correctly process our XML files). Unfortunately like many of the core GNOME C libraries, the documentation is bare-bones and explains almost nothing (like what any of the parsing options actually mean), and I cannot see an obvious way to ask libxml2 to return meaningful errors, or to query exactly what might be wrong with a constructed xmlDoc* object.
It makes me wonder if it would be better in the long term to ditch the reliance on libxml2 and instead use one of the light-weight C++ XML parsing libraries like RapidXml or pugixml instead. Not exactly a trivial change but might not be too cumbersome since the existing XML code is wrapped in our own xmlutil classes and not generally used directly by the rest of the codebase.