Three levels of hidden directories. Awkward. how come they do not show up with attrib?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

A poster who doesn't post descriptive posts. How come you can't describe what you are talking about?

Sincerely,

DosFreak

Does the improved CD-ROM speed detection mean that Flashback no longer requires that special switch in order to run?

Jorpho wrote:

Does the improved CD-ROM speed detection mean that Flashback no longer requires that special switch in order to run?

Don't you mean Fade 2 Black?

And no, the switch is still needed for that.

[quote="DosFreak"]A poster who doesn't post descriptive posts. How come you can't describe what you are talking about?[/quote]

If you are referring to me, well, I can do so, but after posting a few DOSBox bug reports where I precisely stated what the problem was and getting lambasted for it, I really can not be bothered. Why report a bug if it is not going to get corrected?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Freddo wrote:

Jorpho wrote:

Does the improved CD-ROM speed detection mean that Flashback no longer requires that special switch in order to run?

Don't you mean Fade 2 Black?

Quite right. (It's the only game I can recall that seems to particularly care about CD speed.)

I've just come back from vacation and behold! - a nice and shiny new release! 😮

I haven't been able to do much testing yet, but everything seems to work really well so far. I've tried the Doom timedemo benchmark and there seems to be a slight speed improvement.

Thanks guys!

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

If you are referring to me, well, I can do so, but after posting a few DOSBox bug reports where I precisely stated what the prob […]
Show full quote

DosFreak wrote:

A poster who doesn't post descriptive posts. How come you can't describe what you are talking about?

If you are referring to me, well, I can do so, but after posting a few DOSBox bug reports where I precisely stated what the problem was and getting lambasted for it, I really can not be bothered. Why report a bug if it is not going to get corrected?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

What "bugs" are you referring to?

[quote="DosFreak"]What "bugs" are you referring to?[/quote]

Why the scare quotes? They imply that the bugs do not really exist. That is rather rude.

See "0.72: cd Command Bug" (0.72: cd Command Bug).

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Yeah the most critical bug in history, dug out again! Hope you didn't try it in 0.73 yet.

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

DosFreak wrote:

What "bugs" are you referring to?

Why the scare quotes? They imply that the bugs do not really exist. That is rather rude.

See "0.72: cd Command Bug" (0.72: cd Command Bug).

Not everybody would agree that it's a bug (although the typo is), just some functionality that doesn't take into account certain rare cases that you happened to stumble upon and thus provides a misleading suggestion. Wd can come across as a bit of a grumpybear, but don't let that stop you from submitting bug reports. The devs may decide not to act on them if they don't agree with your assessment, but they will look.

[quote="Kippesoep"][quote="Gene Wirchenko"][quote="DosFreak"]What "bugs" are you referring to?[/quote]

Why the scare quotes? They imply that the bugs do not really exist. That is rather rude.

See "0.72: cd Command Bug" (0.72: cd Command Bug).[/quote]
Not everybody would agree that it's a bug (although the typo is), just some functionality that doesn't take into account certain rare cases that you happened to stumble upon and thus provides a misleading suggestion. Wd can come across as a bit of a grumpybear, but don't let that stop you from submitting bug reports. The devs may decide not to act on them if they don't agree with your assessment, but they [i]will[/i] look.[/quote]

Some functionality that does not take into account certain rare cases IS a bug. In those cases, the result is wrong. Therefore, it is a bug.

Now, it might not be considered a high-priority item, and I understand that. The response of blowing someone off is rude.

Were I in charge of logging bugs, I might have replied with something like "Your bug report has been logged, but the item is rather low priority. It will be looked at the next time the code in that area is reviewed." Then, I would see that such a review was scheduled and did take place.

It is a much friendlier attitude and does not set up a devs vs. everyone else mentality.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

as wd hinted it was improved in 0.73 because of your report

If we are to go nitpicking about this: Can something be a bug, if the expected behaviour is not listed as part of the specification?

I've tested my (floppy) version of LoL and it works fine. Try to download latest patch (1.23 i believe) and/or change cputype in dosbox.conf and/or change soundcart type.

Patching to 1.23 works beautifully, thank you! Should I (or someone else) post a note somewhere informing others of this?

MiniMax wrote:

If we are to go nitpicking about this: Can something be a bug, if the expected behaviour is not listed as part of the specification?

I'd not call it such, especially since in this case it is not part of the application's purpose. An issue/RFE, yes, a bug, no. If it failed to change to an existing directory, I'd call it a bug. It's how we handle things at my work and that appears to be pretty much how wd has handled it (although the typo still exists 😀 ).

[quote="MiniMax"]If we are to go nitpicking about this: Can something be a bug, if the expected behaviour is not listed as part of the specification?/quote]

Yes.

There is an implied spec. Would anyone seriously say that cd has to be formally spec'ed? What would the value of that be? It is not as if it is being done for the first time.

Do you know what the cd command is supposed to do? Probably!

Is that a spec? Not formal, but yes.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Gene Wirchenko wrote:

There is an implied spec. Would anyone seriously say that cd has to be formally spec'ed? What would the value of that be? It is not as if it is being done for the first time.

Do you know what the cd command is supposed to do? Probably!

Is that a spec? Not formal, but yes.

There probably is a formal spec somewhere, but even without that, its purposes is to change the directory and give an error message if it fails. The hint is just a hint to point the user in the correct direction and it needn't be correct. If it were supposed to give the perfect answer, then it shouldn't need to, but just change to the directory anyway, assuming it exists. Right now, while it matches what you wanted, it'll still say "~1" every time, even though you might've wanted ~2 or ~79 instead.

If you want to get technical (talking about specs and such), then it should probably just be like DOS and say something like "The system cannot find the path specified." and nothing else :p

Seems 0.73 fixed the mouse sensitivity issue in STTNG: A Final Unity (previously needed to crank sensitivity to 500, now it's fine at 100), certainly won't complain about that 😎 . Overall 0.73 seems to be a nice upgrade, though I haven't had any major issues with any version of DOSBox for years now.

Thanks for keeping DOS alive, I'm not sure where I'd be without DOSBox!