JGR's Patch Pack

[MagicBuzz]

Strange.

I got the issue with lastest commit, but it was partially fixed by reverting some versions : I got back all languages, but messages IDs were misaligned with the program : all texts were mixed.

I revert back to the lastest commit, then now everything is fine.

Probably some files VS decided to not recompile.

[nirasa]

I have Linux and I compile this program. I can't make a package for 0.35 = missing ./configure - the package doesn't exist. Did you change anything?
Sorry for my english
nirasa

Trunk recently adopted CMake. You'll need to use that instead of configure.
Run:

Code: Select all

mkdir build
cd build
cmake ..
make

or see here.

I am sorry. I'm not a programmer and these lines won't compile me. I do not understand that. Can you help me please?

Error:

[_dp_]

I am sorry. I'm not a programmer and these lines won't compile me. I do not understand that. Can you help me please?

It's literally "cmake .." not just "cmake".

[nirasa]

I am sorry. I'm not a programmer and these lines won't compile me. I do not understand that. Can you help me please?

It's literally "cmake .." not just "cmake".

Ok - I've already fixed the command, but there's a mistake - I attached files.

[JGR]

I am sorry. I'm not a programmer and these lines won't compile me. I do not understand that. Can you help me please?

It's literally "cmake .." not just "cmake".

Ok - I've already fixed the command, but there's a mistake - I attached files.

It looks fine to me.
If you run make, does it work?

[nirasa]

It's literally "cmake .." not just "cmake".

Ok - I've already fixed the command, but there's a mistake - I attached files.

It looks fine to me.
If you run make, does it work?

No. The terminal writes that "...no targets are specified and no makefiles are found. End."

[JGR]

No. The terminal writes that "...no targets are specified and no makefiles are found. End."

The CMake error is shown in your last screenshot.
Helpfully CMakeErrors.log does not contain information about actual errors.

I've pushed an update, try it again.

[nirasa]

No. The terminal writes that "...no targets are specified and no makefiles are found. End."

The CMake error is shown in your last screenshot.
Helpfully CMakeErrors.log does not contain information about actual errors.

I've pushed an update, try it again.

HURA! It's alright! Thank you.

[MagicBuzz]

Hello,

I think I found a bug.

Probably related to this update :

Revision: 6d1535b90279287808f60087c7c325e59cbf807d
Author: Jonathan G Rennison <xxxxxxx>
Date: 12/07/2020 13:32:35
Message:
Also show destination on mouseover when vehicle waiting for PBS/routing restriction

----
Modified: src/vehicle_gui.cpp

When I stop a road vehicle, and buldoze the road in front of it, when I build it again, if I mouve over its status bar (when its written "stopped") then instead of simply showing its destination like the update is aimt to, the vehicle actually start again and run on my new road.

Most of the time I place my mouse there because I want to restart it, so I could admint "it's not a bug, it's a feature", but I'm not sure it's the way it should work

-- Edit: I tried to reproduce the issue like described, but it looks like to me more random than this... I already noticed it several times, but I can't reproduce it

-- Edit2 : Or may I dreamed ? What about showing destination in red when the vehicle is stopped ? It should be less confusing, shouldn't it ?

[JGR]

Hello,

I think I found a bug.

Probably related to this update :

Revision: 6d1535b90279287808f60087c7c325e59cbf807d
Author: Jonathan G Rennison <xxxxxxx>
Date: 12/07/2020 13:32:35
Message:
Also show destination on mouseover when vehicle waiting for PBS/routing restriction

----
Modified: src/vehicle_gui.cpp

When I stop a road vehicle, and buldoze the road in front of it, when I build it again, if I mouve over its status bar (when its written "stopped") then instead of simply showing its destination like the update is aimt to, the vehicle actually start again and run on my new road.

Most of the time I place my mouse there because I want to restart it, so I could admint "it's not a bug, it's a feature", but I'm not sure it's the way it should work

-- Edit: I tried to reproduce the issue like described, but it looks like to me more random than this... I already noticed it several times, but I can't reproduce it

-- Edit2 : Or may I dreamed ? What about showing destination in red when the vehicle is stopped ? It should be less confusing, shouldn't it ?

This is how it now is in trunk.
The red cross on the left hand side is still present when mousing over to see the destination.

The only change I made was to also do the same for trains when in the waiting for PBS/routing restriction state.

I was a bit surprised that it was merged upstream so readily. If I generates significant confusion I can put the feature behind a setting.

[MagicBuzz]

More than a setting, IMO the order should remain red when the vehicle is stopped, or it give impression the vehicle actually restarted.

I reported this as an issue in the trunk as well:
https://github.com/OpenTTD/OpenTTD/issues/8272

[Gadg8eer]

...

I know this patch pack was the first with 32 railtypes, but then again you used to work on the New Map Features project so maybe it was already made and this would be too much work for you... Is there a possibility of 128 roadtypes/tramtypes for this patch pack? The number of distinct roadtypes is well over 32 and combined with tramtypes I find that there's just not enough slots.

[ino]

CMake is fast becoming THE standard over the usual autoconf (i.e. makefile). It is much easier to maintain, and the same config file can be used both for macOS, Windows, and Linux. It is also much easier to maintain than autoconf. Granted, it takes more time to set up.

(although am getting messages suggesting my cmake is out of date, which I think is unlikely).

What version you are using then? JGR requires at least 3.6. You'd be surprised at how many system shipped with outdated CMake.

Where is the configure script? Why the change?

Configure script is part of autoconf, and as I explained, CMake is becoming the new standard, and is much better in long run than dated autoconf.

Compiles just fine in the way we are used to,, and as your patch used to be. Why is this patch now suddenly so different to build?

The changes landed in vanilla OpenTTD on June 6. The latest stable 1.10.2 is released on June 1 before the changes. If you download nightly, it is also now requiring CMake.

If you don't post any error messages, no one can help you.

[JGR]

...

I know this patch pack was the first with 32 railtypes, but then again you used to work on the New Map Features project so maybe it was already made and this would be too much work for you... Is there a possibility of 128 roadtypes/tramtypes for this patch pack? The number of distinct roadtypes is well over 32 and combined with tramtypes I find that there's just not enough slots.

At the moment there is a maximum of 63 road/tram types. I don't think it's likely that the number will increase beyond that, 63 is already barely usable from a UI point of view.

Very disapointed to discover I can't compile the latest patch 0.35 on Fedora. Used to be easy! Cmake just doesn't work. Just comes up with errors, even when I point to the source. Compile instructions don't make much sense (although am getting messages suggesting my cmake is out of date, which I think is unlikely). Can't find the source. Point it to the src but still doesn't work .Where is the configure script? Why the change?

Thanks for your efforts over the years, but think I'll just stick on the last patch that I'm allowed compile which is 0.34-4. I want to play the game, not learn programming everytime there is an update!

To make sure I wasn't going nuts, I downloaded the very latest source code for the game from the official OpenTTD website. Compiles just fine in the way we are used to,, and as your patch used to be as does 0.34-4. Why is the latest version of your patch now suddenly so different and difficult to build, at least for Linux users?

CMake is new and unfamiliar to me as well. I'm not really fond of it either. The main upside is that the Windows/MSVC side is much more sensible than what was there before.

Prior to commit 68f216ca builds did not work with CMake versions less than 3.12. I'd recommend trying with the most recent commit in the jgrpp branch.
It should work with CMake 3.6 or later.

Configure script is part of autoconf, and as I explained, CMake is becoming the new standard, and is much better in long run than dated autoconf.

The configure script was not actually autoconf based.
It is a bit debatable whether CMake qualifies as a/the new standard.

I will see if I can add a shell script wrapper to make it more obvious what to do.

[Auge]

Hello

I am also not able to compile a version of JGRPP 0.35.0 for Ubuntu Linux. I got the same errors as nirasa.

No. The terminal writes that "...no targets are specified and no makefiles are found. End."

I've pushed an update, try it again.

I updated my copy of your repository with git fetch upstream on the branch jgrpp to get the latest commits. After that I moved to the directory build but cmake .. quitted with the message, that no CMakeLists.txt was found in the repos base dir. I moved back to the base dir, made a checkout of the branch jgrpp-0.35.0, moved again to build and repeated the run of cmake ... I got the initial errors (same as nirasa) again.

What is the step I forgot or where I took the wrong way on a junction?

Tschö, Auge

[JGR]

Hello

I am also not able to compile a version of JGRPP 0.35.0 for Ubuntu Linux. I got the same errors as nirasa.

No. The terminal writes that "...no targets are specified and no makefiles are found. End."

I've pushed an update, try it again.

I updated my copy of your repository with git fetch upstream on the branch jgrpp to get the latest commits. After that I moved to the directory build but cmake .. quitted with the message, that no CMakeLists.txt was found in the repos base dir. I moved back to the base dir, made a checkout of the branch jgrpp-0.35.0, moved again to build and repeated the run of cmake ... I got the initial errors (same as nirasa) again.

What is the step I forgot or where I took the wrong way on a junction?

Tschö, Auge

`git fetch` retrieves commits from a remote, but does not change which commit you are currently using locally.

Try:

Code: Select all

git checkout jgrpp
git pull upstream jgrpp

or

Code: Select all

git checkout jgrpp
git reset --hard upstream/jgrpp

Running:

Code: Select all

git log -1

should return something like:

Code: Select all

commit d290fac2ad7034842729980a12ee792dda3538f4 (HEAD -> jgrpp, upstream/jgrpp)
Author: Jonathan G Rennison <j.g.rennison@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed Jul 15 17:10:05 2020 +0100

    Add hotkey to show link graph legend window

[Auge]

Hello

I am also not able to compile a version of JGRPP 0.35.0 for Ubuntu Linux. I got the same errors as nirasa.

[I did …]

`git fetch` retrieves commits from a remote, but does not change which commit you are currently using locally.

You are right. Normally I compile a tag but now I have to compile upstream/jgrpp after only fetching or I have to pull your changes to my branches.

Try:

Code: Select all

git checkout jgrpp
git pull upstream jgrpp

Running:

Code: Select all

git log -1

should return something like:

Code: Select all

commit d290fac2ad7034842729980a12ee792dda3538f4 (HEAD -> jgrpp, upstream/jgrpp)
Author: Jonathan G Rennison <j.g.rennison@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed Jul 15 17:10:05 2020 +0100

    Add hotkey to show link graph legend window

Thank you. The commands cmake .. and make ran successfully.

Tschö, Auge

[MagicBuzz]

Hello JGR,

I'm realizing there are some parameters that are not translated into french.

How can I help you translating to french ?
Should I send you an updated french.txt file ?

[JGR]

Hello JGR,

I'm realizing there are some parameters that are not translated into french.

How can I help you translating to french ?
Should I send you an updated french.txt file ?

Sure, I'm happy to receive translations.

Most of the translations I receive are in the forms of PRs.
This would be preferable as it makes the process much smoother, but if you're not familiar with git just sending an updated french.txt file with a note as to which version you started from would be fine.

[Denswillow]

I had a bug with 35.0, report below: