Rohaq
-
Posts
131 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Developer Articles
KSP2 Release Notes
Bug Reports
Posts posted by Rohaq
-
-
4 hours ago, Jesusthebird said:
MK3X Update fails through Ckan. Its already been noted in the Mk3x thread, however I didnt see it posted here yet.
CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: Mk3Expansion 1.4.7.3: C:\Users\smcin\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp1A5D.tmp has length 20017420, should be 20017396
at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadsComplete(NetModuleCache cache, Uri[] urls, String[] filenames, Exception[] errors)2 hours ago, Shalfar said:I'm having a problem with updating BonVoyage through CKAN. I'm getting this error:
CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: BonVoyage 0.14.2: E:\Temp\tmp8647.tmp has length 161362, should be 161357 at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move) at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadsComplete(NetModuleCache cache, Uri[] urls, String[] filenames, Exception[] errors)
Both of these pull from Spacedock, I'm guessing something might be up there?
-
5 hours ago, JH4C said:
Issues with CKAN should usually be directed at the CKAN devs.
The NetKAN file for this mod is configured to pull from Spacedock. No errors on testing the zip directly from there.
Looks like it's already been reported in the CKAN thread, so I guess we'll have to wait.
-
@Icecovery Hmm, something's a bit odd getting this off CKAN:
CKAN.InvalidModuleFileKraken: ComfortableLanding V1.6: C:\Users\<my username>\AppData\Local\Temp\tmp72B1.tmp has length 10959456, should be 10959281
at CKAN.NetModuleCache.Store(CkanModule module, String path, String description, Boolean move)
at CKAN.NetAsyncModulesDownloader.ModuleDownloadsComplete(NetModuleCache cache, Uri[] urls, String[] filenames, Exception[] errors)I also noticed that the last commit on the git repo has the README.md updated, but no other files committed/updated?
-
On 6/1/2018 at 4:02 AM, Brigadier said:
First, I presume that the link displayed in CKAN under Metadata is pointing to the same out-dated place and that it can be corrected in the netkan file. I'd take a crack at submitting a PR but I don't know where the netkan file is.
Yeah, the .netkan file uses SpaceDock as a reference to pull this information down. It's possible it could be patched there, but the preference is generally to use references to a primary source that the author updates directly, to avoid them having to remember to manually update the netkan alongside it.
-
8 hours ago, wasml said:
If I understand you correctly - at least the extra nodes should be doable with a ModuleManager patch.
Just tested this and it adds four bottom nodes to the stock 2.5 service bay:
@PART[ServiceBay_250] { // Position Direction // X Y Z X Y Z NodeSize node_stack_n1 = 0.6, -0.5, -0.6, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_n2 = 0.6, -0.5, 0.6, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_n3 = -0.6, -0.5, 0.6, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 node_stack_n4 = -0.6, -0.5, -0.6, 0.0, 1.0, 0.0, 1 }This could use a bit of tweaking and a set of top nodes but they would be a duplicate of these nodes with a +Y position and a -Y direction. If you want to fiddle with this - the first three numbers for each node are the X,Y,Z position and the second three the node attach direction. If you do change something you'll need to either exit KSP and reload or, in the space center scene press Alt F11 and reload the database. A more complex solution would be to use the truss system to add the nodes but this would require a model for the truss and considerably more config changes.
Ah nice, maybe I'll have a play with this; though I'd be a little pained to patch a stock part with additional attachment nodes; what happens if someone uses it, builds a craft attaching parts to the nodes, then removes the patch and loads their save?
-
So I was looking to fit a stacked Size 0 science part, and ended up needing to use an Size 1 cargo bay just to stack a single module nicely with the other Size 1 parts on my ship, wasting a ton of space in the cargo bay.
What I thought would be interesting to see would be a cargo bay with Size 1 attachments either end for stacking, a "fat" centre to allow for space, and four stacked attachment points inside, allowing multiple Size 0 parts to be attached neatly in the final design.
Here's a mockup using tweakscale to slightly increase the size of the cargo bay, using some procedural structural parts for smooth size changes, and a plate adapter for attachments. I'm pretty certain it's doable, but I'm no modeller/modder. Can anyone else weigh in? Or can possibly suggest an existing part mod that does something similar?
-
34 minutes ago, linuxgurugamer said:
It's a dependency. In other words, you need it installed.
Gotcha, just checking it wasn't a known conflict
-
23 hours ago, linuxgurugamer said:
Do you have IFS installed?
I do, is that likely to be the cause, or is it a prerequisite?
I'll see if I can muster together some logs.
-
Two issues in 1.4.3.1:
1. Procedural Fairing upgrades show up in the part list, despite not being usable.
2. All but the smallest stock Airstream Protective Shell parts have disappeared, and resizing that one (via Tweakscale I assume) leads to the base becoming stupidly oversized.
I'm guessing these two might be related? Maybe it's patching the wrong fairing part, hiding the Airstreams, rather than the procedural fairing upgrade parts?
-
First of all, I love Octosat, it makes for some beautiful satellites!
I'm having an odd issue with the gargantuan dish though; when activated, the opening/closing animation just keeps repeating. It still seems to be working, at least.
I've got a bunch of other mods installed, and I may be able to test this with them removed later, but was just interested to know if anyone had seen the same problem.
Video:
-
On 5/4/2018 at 1:19 AM, HebaruSan said:
The hierarchy is based on the numerical ordering of the versions of the mod, which you can check on the Versions tab. It tries to install the latest version that's compatible with any of the game versions you selected. Sometimes this logic can get confused if a mod has a weird non-sequential ordering to its versions; for example, Mk2Expansion looks like this:
Version 1.8.1 came out after 1.8.06, even though 6 is greater than 1 (the "1" probably represents 10 somehow). So while it looks like it's trying to downgrade you if you only go by the version number, it's actually trying to install the most recent version, the only version that's compatible with KSP 1.4.
Reported this in the Mk2Expansion thread, since they should probably fix their version numbering to avoid future headaches
-
Just a small thing; your version numbering is a bit off
Version numbers aren't treated like floats; 2:1.8.1 shouldn't be a newer version than 2:1.8.02 to 2:1.8.06, since naturally sorting those minor versions results in ".06" being treated as the same as ".6", while ".1" isn't treated like ".10". If you meant to release this as ".10", it should have been "2:1.8.10" as the version string, so programs like CKAN can figure out the correct order of release. This also means you can use 3 digit minor version numbers, should you ever need to.
It thankfully doesn't cause issues at the moment, since the Compatible KSP Version is different, but if you make a release across the same KSP versions in the future, it might cause issues with people installing older versions of the mod, and reporting already fixed problems in the thread
-
Just a minor niggle; your version numbering is a bit off. Version numbers between periods are considered numbers in their own right when it comes to software versioning; the entire version string isn't treated like a floating decimal number, for example:
0.5 is the latest version of your mod, but you've got an older versions of v0.14, 0.13, and 0.12 - Because 12, 13, and 14 are all higher than 5, they're considered "newer" versions by applications like CKAN.
If these were versions 0.1.2, 0.1.3, and 0.1.4, it wouldn't be a problem, or alternatively if the latest version was 0.50, it would detected it as a newer version. As it is, this isn't the case
-
1 hour ago, Galileo said:
Scatterers ocean shaders are the hungriest in terms of performance. Disable them and ocean refractions.
also, kopernicus currently is causing a big performance issues with mid to low range computers. A fix is being tested however. So if you have kopernicus, it may also be the culprit
Dang, it could be Kopernicus, I've been disabling a bunch of other visual mods, including Scatterer, EVE, and associated packs for it, but I've only been seeing a few more FPS in performance.
I'll keep an eye on Kopernicus' updates, and maybe see if there's some configuration changes I can make there.
-
I'm currently getting some crap performance in KSP, and I'm trying to track down the causes across my visual mods. Does anyone know what kind of impact on performance each option in the Scatterer config has?
-
On 4/5/2018 at 11:34 PM, raidernick said:
yes
Sorry, I only just got around to doing this
-
I realise that this is the unmodded install forum, but are you certain you don't have any mods installed at all? I had the same issue when I had a mod that required Modular Flight Integrator, that I'd forgotten to install:
-
Very cool mod, thanks!
Do you have any information of the .cfg file parameters? Most of them make sense, but I'm wondering specifically what "memoryGizmo" does
-
They've already "fixed" it in the latest release - They did it by disabling their solar panel implementation in 1.4.3, at least until they can figure out a proper fix for it.
-
https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/commit/449711484d595d9c06d607b3437350dce3d22b0f
Looking forward to this release, considering now MechJeb Dev and Scatterer are affected
EDIT: Can I suggest the next release name of Goddard?
-
2 minutes ago, Tyko said:
Thanks! did I do something wrong? I see it come up under Filter (New) but there's no checkbox next to it as if I was running an incompatible version of KSP (I'm running 1.4.2)
I'm guessing it has something to do with this?
Though I'm not sure how this would be resolved, seeing as I don't have the DLC.
-
19 minutes ago, Tyko said:
@HebaruSan, please add the following mod to CKAN. It's on Github
https://github.com/TykoTek/EngineTweaks_for_MakingHistory/releases/tag/v1
EngineTweaks_for_MakingHistory
This mod adjusts the specs on Making History engines and 3 stock engines to balance them and ensure every engine has a unique niche. The changes are balanced against other engines. If the thrust is changed, weight is also adjusted accordingly.
WARNING: Recommend only using with a new save. Amongst other things, this mod removes the Poodle from the game which could have a serious impact on existing games.
Google Sheets link documenting all changes: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1tzovHSBZm_4_xLrglqAKbmLzeGQozpZfQr2YAaOTs8k/edit?usp=sharing
Requires Module Manager
There's a good guide for doing this yourself: https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/wiki/Adding-a-mod-to-the-CKAN
Following that guide, adding your mod to Spacedock is probably the easiest method, since it can submit the mod to CKAN when you submit it - plus it has the bonus of your mod being updated on CKAN when you make changes to it via Spacedock.
Plus it's a good platform for folks to find your mod who aren't using CKAN.
-
On 4/22/2018 at 12:50 AM, Jimbodiah said:
Check here, it might help solve the stutter
Or at least help me find the main contributor to it. Thanks!
EDIT: It didn't completely solve it, but it definitely helped, thanks @Jimbodiah!
-
On 4/19/2018 at 10:52 PM, aviatorEngineer said:
What about sending an engineer up with konstruction ports using KIS and KAS to manually swap em out? Seems less risky.
Doing this now, and good Christ this is going to take forever. Not helped by stuttering when I'm around my station - probably because of so many parts
Also, as a bonus, apparently one of my docking ports is surface attached to a procedural tank, and since Konstruction ports need nodes to work, I'm a tad screwed there. At least it's not attached to anything though; I guess this is my docking port for the station now
CKAN (The Comprehensive Kerbal Archive Network); v1.28.0 - Dyson
in KSP1 Mod Releases
Posted
How will this affect people who may have already installed the mod in its previous state? Does CKAN note that the metadata has changed, and the mod should be redownloaded and reinstalled?