Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


6,535 Excellent

Contact Methods

Profile Information

  • About me
    Boldly crashing what no Kerbal has crashed before!
  • Location
    Universe ! Virgo ! Milkway ! OrionArm ! SolarSystem ! Earth ! America ! SouthAmerica ! Brazil ! SãoPaulo ! Capital ! Home ! LivingRoom ! MyChair
  • Interests
    I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of lines of code cried out in Null Reference Exceptions and were suddenly flooding the KSP.log...

Recent Profile Visitors

21,618 profile views
  1. So… Someone with more than enough money wanted a new Ventador Lambo, but by some reason he likes water more than asphalt. So this crazy dude did this: Yeah. The dude built a high performance catamaran (180MPH!!!) with Lamborghini look and feel (and parts!!). More : https://yachting.entropia.mc/?post_type=portfolio&p=1488
  2. Hi! I need the full KSP.log, and not only the error messages, as the rest of the log have the information I need to pinpoint who is borking on us. Additionally, given the nature of the problem, I may need the ModuleManager.ConfigCache too. See the OP, on the hidden section called Support, to see where you can find these files. Zip them and publish them using dropbox or something similar - or, if you have a github account, you can drag and drop them on a comment on this link. Paste a link to your post here so I can connect the dots!
  3. Try to mangle the "minimumTargetRelativeAngle" thingy to see if anything changes. In in the middle of a <piii>storm at dayjob, I don't know when I will have spare time to tinker with the Poodmund's skybox - probably on the weekend. But I'm guessing that this setting may help you on the matter. Cheers!
  4. Found it! [ERR 15:17:24.641] [AssemblyLoader] Exception when getting assembly attributes: Exception of type 'System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException' was thrown. Additional information about this exception: System.TypeLoadException: Could not load type of field 'JanitorsCloset.JanitorsClosetLoader:Log' (0) due to: Could not load file or assembly 'KSP_Log, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its dependencies. assembly:KSP_Log, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null type:<unknown type> member:(null) signature:<none> You need to install this thing, it's a missing dependency for JanitorsCloset. Interesting enough, I found no warning about missing dependencies on your KSP.log...
  5. This is truly demonic. I would had made a hell of a fuss on my neighbourhood with one of these when young!! Put one of these on my hands and I will show you… (after leaving jail ) I think I would have company doing my time!
  6. Send me screenshots of the problem, your KSP.log and a link for the Skybox you are using Let's see if I manage to reproduce the thing here on the week end! It's not drawing some parts on distant vessels. I need to study what changed on some ReStock parts and try to code something to convince DOE to draw them.
  7. Hi! The (more or less) current list of Companions can be found here: https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/TweakScaleCompanion Anything else is a trial-and-miss , as you have realised. The reason is that as 3rd party PartModules are added, I need to inspect them in order to understand how they work, and then be able to cook a recipe teaching TweakScale how to scale them (and then write a MM patch). Sometimes it's really easy, sometimes not at all! You will find some comprehensive (but somewhat messy) tutorials here.
  8. A ramp will do. As a matter of fact, is how boarding parts were implemented on AP+! The problem I see is doing a ramp that would fit a size1 or size1.5 tail cone without being too steep for a Kerbal to use when extended. The MD-85 stairs is more or less 45 to 50º degrees, and I don't think a Kerbal will climb it without some kind of help. On the other hand, you can extend the ramp to allow it to be less steep, trading angle for length. It~s how the AP+ ramp were implemented, by the way. It will not be exactly as the MD-85 you want to mimic, but it may be near enough! Cheers
  9. This kind of stairs on KSP is tricky, because on KSP the crafts use ladders, that relies on a different code to do the job. So you will need to do a stair with the step large enough to induce KSP physics ot think it's something like a ground stairs, like the stairs on the top of the VAB - and, then, I don't think such device would fit on a 1.5 or even 2.0 bulkhead profile as I would use on a MD-87. I think this is exactly the reason the "Size 1.5 Air Ramp" is a ramp, by the way.
  10. As far as I understand, this is already happening - if you are on the surface of the Mün, you will not see the stars while on the bright side. The stars are dimmed when your eyes are receiving direct or indirect sunlight (it's the reason you don't see the stars on the surface of the Moon at the bright side, the sunlight being reflect by the sand is reaching your retina). Same thing while orbiting Earth - if you can see the Earth while being illuminated by the Sun, then the light bring reflected by the planet will prevent you from seeing the stars the same. However if give your back to both Sun and Earth, when you will be able to see the stars alright because there will be no direct or indirect sunlight reaching your eyes (there's no scattering on Space). Are you sure this is not happening for you? I just fired up my test bed and the stars became visible once Kerbol is occluded by Kerbin! I think there's something else playing a role on this issue. Are you guys using a custom skybox or any other visual enhancement? More or less. When startuping the game, DOE checks if there's no customized values on the KSP/PluginData. If none are found, it tries to read the Default values from a "hidden" file on its plugin data. If the file is found, the default values are read, if not the values hardcoded on the DLL are used. Once you customize the settings, the new values are stored on the KSP/PluginData. BUT… As I said, I failed to prevent that the new customisations settings would be needed by 3rd parties, so the whole model will be reworked. It will will not change dramatically, but it will change a bit. https://github.com/net-lisias-ksp/DistantObject/issues/25
  11. For obvious reasons (I burned the midnight oil half the week!), Midnight Syndrome by Lebowski.
  12. Don't bother, it's screwed up. I just realised that I added customisation settings intended to be eventually used by 3rd parties on Planet Packs, but didn't provided a way to allow them to patch the damned things, forcing the user to do it manually!! I will tackle it down on Issue #25.
  13. Hi! You got bitten by a nasty KSP bug on a thingy called "Assembly Loader/Resolver", this is what loads DLLs to be used by KSP and so any problem on it is pretty nasty. The problem is triggered when something fails to be loaded by any reason, what breaks something inside the thing and from that point, anything else trying to load somethings fails no matter what - even when everything is right. Since TweakScale cannot allow a savegame to be loaded when it is not on a consistent state (as this would destroy all scaled parts on the savegame!!), TweakScale checks if everything is allright after being loaded and, if not, yells about so you can do something about - like asking help here. On the KSP log you sent, the problem appears to be unrelated to USI at all… Apparently it's EnvironmentalVisualEnhancements! [ERR 17:55:41.210] ADDON BINDER: Cannot resolve assembly: Utils, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null [ERR 17:55:41.213] AssemblyLoader: Exception loading 'CelestialShadows': System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException: Exception of type 'System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadExce ption' was thrown. at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes(System.Reflection.Assembly,bool) at System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes () [0x00000] in <9577ac7a62ef43179789031239ba8798>:0 at AssemblyLoader.LoadAssemblies () [0x000e6] in <39c0323fb6b449a4aaf3465c00ed3c8d>:0 Additional information about this exception: System.IO.FileNotFoundException: Could not load file or assembly 'Utils, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' or one of its dependencies. File name: 'Utils, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null' It's trying to load a thingy called Utils, but this thing is not being found. This is that triggers the Assembly Loader/Resolver bug - from this point, everybody else is being screwing - as DOE. Even Recall is being caught indirectly by this mess! [LOG 17:55:51.764] Calling KSP-Recall.ModuleManagerSupport.ModuleManagerAddToModList() [EXC 17:55:51.775] Add to mod list threw an exception in loading CelestialShadows, Version=, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=null: System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadExce ption: Exception of type 'System.Reflection.ReflectionTypeLoadException' was thrown. at (wrapper managed-to-native) System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes(System.Reflection.Assembly,bool) at System.Reflection.Assembly.GetTypes () [0x00000] in <9577ac7a62ef43179789031239ba8798>:0 at ModuleManager.ModListGenerator.GetAdditionalModsFromStaticMethods (ModuleManager.Logging.IBasicLogger logger) [0x00021] in <410b7909691747c78c895491c954d2a4>:0 I think that USI was just an innocent bystander that had the bad luck of stepping on the mine, triggering this cascade of events. Perhaps whatever installed USI updated EVE too, and then you got the impression that USI was the problem! In a way or another, your best line of action is to reach EVE maintainers and ask for help about the missing "Util" thingy. You may want to uninstall EVE until they fix the problem, otherwise you will not be able to startup your game! (Removing TweakScale will only remove the one yelling about the problem, the problem will be still there, screwing up silently everybody else!)
  14. It's a pretty counter-straightforward formula and the new parameters trim it in a equally counter-straightforward way. minimumSignificantBodySize is simple: if defines the smaller body (in visible pixels) that will be considered on the sky dimming. It helps to make things faster on Potatoes by ignoring bodies with an apparent size smaller than the threshold. In pixels. minimumTargetRelativeAngle is the relative angle between Camera and the current body being calculated in which the dimming will happen. You can trim the point of the screen the current body will trigger dimming the sky. Given the other parameters, it ended not being that useful in the end because more than one body can trigger the sky dimming (and, when this happens, the "stronger" one will prevail, and not the one you may thinking of). In degrees from 1 to 180. not only size, but distance matters on the formula! referenceBodySize the size of the reference body (usually the Sun). The size of all the bodies are floored and then normalised with this parameter before being fed into the formula. This one will be useful on custom Star Systems where the Sun (always the brightest body in the visible sky) is smaller than Kerbol. I don't have the slightest idea about the unit of this thing!! That's really great news. I'm currently facing some difficulties to test this on visuals add'ons because I'm essentially using mobile GPUs (and the really crappy ones!). I'm still fighting to buy a nice GPU card, but things are still incredibly expensive around here due import taxes (really, really expensive - the final tax is 115% the price you paid for the good, shipping and insurance included! it's plain nuts!). Buying a second hand one (what would help save a bit of money) is out of question due the cripto-mining breakage flooding the market with badly beaten GPUs - it would worth the risk if the card would be being sold by 25 to 30% of the MRSP, but at 80% to 100%? Now and then I find a offer on eBay for a brand new one cheaper that some second hand ones! Thanks for the help!!
  15. Well, without more information, I can only guess. Send me the KSP.log after reproducing the problem so I can check for some Exception or any other weirdly. But, back to the guess: apparently you had diagnosed the mishap yourself - something on the new BDArmory Plus is reseting something, and TweakScale is being caught with its pants down. Since some time TweakScale ceased to force its weight on 3rd parties (see this post for more information), and started to rely on a sane KSP runtime (exactly to prevent TweakScale from doing this to 3rd parties, by the way). Problem is that once TweakScale started to rely on the KSP runtime (what was made possible by Recall), it became vulnerable to being screwed by 3rd parties. Apparently it was what happened to you. Since I had problems with Procedural Parts myself (see this post for more information), I think I know why BDA+ guys did things this way (again, assuming it's really DBA+): in a nutshell, Procedural Parts neglects correct data to KSP on OnLoad, and so someone else needs to update it by brute-force later. The way I solved it for TweakScale was to write a patch on KSP-Recall to scavenge the correct data and fill the empty spaces while loading KSP, what for all effects solves the root problem without screwing up anybody else. You can find the patch here. And I did it on Recall because fixing 3rd parties is completely out of scope for TweakScale, Recall is the place where I choose to fix these problems. This removes TweakScale from a problem in which it's completely innocent, and centralizes my fixing efforts on a single place where it's easier (or less hard) to have everything synchronised. What I suggest you to do is: Be absolutely sure it's the BDArmory Plus the source of the misbehaviour: Revert BDA+ to the previous release. If the problem goes away, you have confirmation. Once you had confirmed the problem is BDArmory Plus, reach the maintainers explaining the problem and pinpointing the patch I linked above (or just link this post to them and call it a day!) With this information, they will be able to decide if they add a dependency on KSP-Recall (and activates the patch for themselves too) or if they try to fix the problem themselves on a custom patch (and remove whatever clutch they hypothetically did on code). Both ways will work, it's the nice thing about fixing things using patches. Assuming the problem is really on BDArmory Plus, the maintainers ideally should take proper measures to fix the problem on their side on a way that respects the KSP's PartModule's life cycle (as I did on Recall), otherwise they will be screwing up any 3rd parties that need tp trust the PartModule's info (and not only TweakScale). Cheers!
  • Create New...