[1.12.3+] RealChute Parachute Systems v1.4.9.5 | 20/10/24

[Cerebrate]

I'm not going to endorse Squad's broken crap. All I can say is deal with it, and I'll remember to not take note of bug reports coming from your way as RealChute is not tested on 64bit.

I wouldn't have sent you any further bug reports on x64 since (a) it's not reliable enough, which I know, and ( you don't want 'em, which you've said. I don't ask you to endorse anyone's "broken crap". I might have asked you not to make people's lives more annoying by going out of your way to break your crap for people who are willing to take the risk and do their own testing, had I thought of it, but hey, so it goes.

...and while I'm at it, for the benefit of anyone else out there reading this for whom RealChute works great on Windows x64, since the license permits this, I've already taken the time, and not everyone has a copy of Visual Studio lying around, here's the duly-nobbled-and-compiled .DLL to drop into your 1.2.5 installation:

Disclaimer: works great for me, may not work so great or indeed at all for you, and is completely and utterly unsupported by anyone. But if you like to fly unsafe or don't feel like spending time trying to de-RealChute your existing saves, there y'go.

-c

Edited October 8, 2014 by stupid_chris
No.

[NoMrBond]

On that note, RealChute is now disabled completely on all Windows 64bit build as many other mods are. Squad has as well as us have judged the 64bit builds on Windows to be unstable, so as a result, for your safety and to save us some time hunting down 64bit crashes, this mod will be disabled.

Thank you for your understanding.

Enjoy!

Disabled is a bit extreme isn't it? Don't want to support or accept bug reports from Win/x64 fine, but flat out disabling? And other mods are doing this too?

Oh well, your mod, your call.

[NathanKell]

NoMrBond: in .24, we tried just a warning. It didn't work.

Heck, people ignore CompatabilityChecker warnings all the time, even when it's about shifting KSP versions, not just x86-x64 stuff! That's why a lot of us moved to, finally, actually lock stuff down on CC check fail.

You can look back at my posts on the CC thread where I was arguing against doing so. Sadly, I was proven wrong.

[Starwaster]

Disclaimer: works great for me, may not work so great or indeed at all for you, and is completely and utterly unsupported by anyone. But if you like to fly unsafe or don't feel like spending time trying to de-RealChute your existing saves, there y'go.

-c

i think you should go the extra mile and give them support

if you're going to pull a stunt like this.

Edited October 8, 2014 by stupid_chris

[stupid_chris]

I wouldn't have sent you any further bug reports on x64 since (a) it's not reliable enough, which I know, and ( you don't want 'em, which you've said. I don't ask you to endorse anyone's "broken crap". I might have asked you not to make people's lives more annoying by going out of your way to break your crap for people who are willing to take the risk and do their own testing, had I thought of it, but hey, so it goes.

...and while I'm at it, for the benefit of anyone else out there reading this for whom RealChute works great on Windows x64, since the license permits this, I've already taken the time, and not everyone has a copy of Visual Studio lying around, here's the duly-nobbled-and-compiled .DLL to drop into your 1.2.5 installation:

Disclaimer: works great for me, may not work so great or indeed at all for you, and is completely and utterly unsupported by anyone. But if you like to fly unsafe or don't feel like spending time trying to de-RealChute your existing saves, there y'go.

-c

Alright that's not going to be cool.

I'm changing my license. From now on, you must get my explicit permission before releasing a modified version of RealChute.

You don't have mine on that one.

[Cerebrate]

@starwaster: If it's unsupported, it's unsupported. I'm not interested in forking the project, because the current version works great.

I'm perfectly willing to use it at-my-own-risk. I'm making that available to other people who wish to do so at _their_ own risk.

@stupid_chris: Noted for future releases.

-c

[Gryphon]

Hey, just a note, I just got freaked out a bit: In the first post, there's a big red link, "v1.2 release notes, please read before installing." So, I follow it, and I read the following, also in big red text: "...Also please note that this will break all currently in flight vessels..."

I was freaking out - until I finally realized that the link points at a post from the release of v1.2, way back in July, and that the v1.2.5 release post (from 7 Oct) doesn't have that big red scary text.

If I am correct in understanding that v1.2.5 won't break in-flight vessels from a v1.2.4 install, then perhaps that could be made clearer somehow? (I understand there still might be someone who is just now upgrading from a pre-v1.2 install, but for the rest of us, perhaps something updated is in order?)

Thanks!

[stupid_chris]

@starwaster: If it's unsupported, it's unsupported. I'm not interested in forking the project, because the current version works great.

I'm perfectly willing to use it at-my-own-risk. I'm making that available to other people who wish to do so at _their_ own risk.

@stupid_chris: Noted for future releases.

-c

Alright, I reacted quickly because I was either at work, either empressed earlier even when I released this and didn't have the time to make my point clear, but here's how it goes.

The Windowsx64 builds of KSP are unstable. 0.25 is at least twice as unstable as 0.24 was. I know, I had access to the 0.25 builds for a few weeks now, moderators have experimental access. Hell, I had to stop testing RealChute on the 64bit builds because I couldn't log in 30mins without crashing. It's that bad. Squad knows it, the modders know it, I know it, you know it, everyone knows it. But Squad still decides to release Windows64bit builds.

Therefore, me, as well as most modders are refusing to endorse this. We tried the passive way by warning users with 0.24. But as it has been shown many, many times, users do not listen to CompatibilityChecker warnings. Hell, I had numerous bug reports that nothing would appear when using 1.2.4 on 0.25, DESPITE the fact that as soon as you boot the game, a warning CLEARLY says that RealChute is incompatible with this version and might be disabled/unfunctional, and to wait for an update.

Considering the state of the builds, the lack of attention from the users, and the amount of KSP bugs blamed on our mods, we have collectively decided to lock up our mods on Windowsx64 KSP builds.

This means I do not support 64bit for Windows. I do not want to have unofficial unlocked versions floating around, and have to asked myself "did this guy get the unlocked version and is now reporting bugs that are 64bit problems". If you want to unlock it for yourself, you know what you are doing if you can unlock it yourself. But I don't want you or anyone to redistribute those versions.

If you have complaints, I'm not the one you should address them to. Squad shouldn't release those builds.

Hey, just a note, I just got freaked out a bit: In the first post, there's a big red link, "v1.2 release notes, please read before installing." So, I follow it, and I read the following, also in big red text: "...Also please note that this will break all currently in flight vessels..."

I was freaking out - until I finally realized that the link points at a post from the release of v1.2, way back in July, and that the v1.2.5 release post (from 7 Oct) doesn't have that big red scary text.

If I am correct in understanding that v1.2.5 won't break in-flight vessels from a v1.2.4 install, then perhaps that could be made clearer somehow? (I understand there still might be someone who is just now upgrading from a pre-v1.2 install, but for the rest of us, perhaps something updated is in order?)

Thanks!

Yep you're right. It's from uipgrading from pre-1.2 versions to post-1.2.

Edited October 8, 2014 by stupid_chris

[LuciferNZ]

Alright that's not going to be cool.

I'm changing my license. From now on, you must get my explicit permission before releasing a modified version of RealChute.

You don't have mine on that one.

So, now you're not only disabling it for x64 (Due to people not listening, thus punishing those that DO)- but you're not letting people use an x64 modded version?

Wow. I guess people who run a lot of mods will have to either learn to live without realchutes, cut down massive mod lists (if they use them) or use the OpenGL hack(ish).

I can understand it, from a coders point of view - but I do think you were quite harsh on the guy for providing an alternative to the few of us who use x64 KSP.

As was said above, your mod, your call ;p

EDIT: Just read your follow up post - fair enough, I didnt realise it had gotten that bad with that side of x64 and modding feedback/bugs. Read my post with a grain of salt therefore

Edited October 8, 2014 by LuciferNZ

[flightmaster]

Squad shouldn't release those builds.

Amen to that brother

[Cerebrate]

Look, I get it, I do. I'm in the software business in my day job, so I have also been through the we-don't-support-that-version please-stop-sending-us-bug-reports no-that's-not-my-fork dance more times than I can count or stomach rememberin'. I wouldn't want to be stuck reading through a bunch of useless ones either.

But while it is buggier than I would like, and a damn sight buggier than I'd want to see in a production release, it is at least usable. And for those of us with a lot of mods, it's the only game in town, unless we feel like figuring out how to set up a requisitely-equipped Linux dual-boot partition just to run KSP and kiss multitasking goodbye - that, or try and figure out which 30-40-odd of 91 mods on my must-have list I feel like living without for the next however long. I can't even _load_ x86 KSP without chopping it down that much.

Which is why this:

Therefore, me, as well as most modders are refusing to endorse this. We tried the passive way by warning users with 0.24. But as it has been shown many, many times, users do not listen to CompatibilityChecker warnings. Hell, I had numerous bug reports that nothing would appear when using 1.2.4 on 0.25, DESPITE the fact that as soon as you boot the game, a warning CLEARLY says that RealChute is incompatible with this version and might be disabled/unfunctional, and to wait for an update.

Considering the state of the builds, the lack of attention from the users, and the amount of KSP bugs blamed on our mods, we have collectively decided to lock up our mods on Windowsx64 KSP builds.

...feels like a big ol' kick right in the forum rules. (The more so now I learn it's a collective decision and I can expect repeats of the problem, yay.) Because you're right when it comes to the complaints I have about the x64 build itself, when you say:

If you have complaints, I'm not the one you should address them to. Squad shouldn't release those builds.

But my problem now isn't coming from the x64 build. My problem's coming from the way that y'all's collective decision (which y'all have a perfect right to make) isn't biting Squad 'cept very indirectly, and it's not biting the people who can't get mods to work and come complainin' to you either. The people it bites the most are the ones who like y'all's mods so much we'll put up with the lack of support and the buggy x64 build just to run 'em. And not to put too fine a point on it, we didn't do it and don't deserve to be on the sharp end of y'all's protest.

Now I'm not trying to be totally unreasonable for all that I am rather cranky and a mite drunk at this point in time, and I will of course obey your new licensing conditions, and I will be more than happy to stick big ol' disclaimers everywhere telling people that this hack is unsupported and not to bother you with any problems that may ensue, for whatever good it does, but I do think it is rather unlikely that I am the only person in the category I've just described, and people in that category who don't know any C# and don't have Visual Studio lying around don't deserve to get the sharp end of the stick either. And shipping something under an open-source license, CC included, is traditionally considered implicit - actually explicit - permission to fix whatever problems you or whoever might run into for the common benefit, not just one's own.

And this was very much our problem.

-c

[stupid_chris]

That's all cool, you can do whatever you want for yourself. However, distributing is not right, because not everyone has your experience, knowledge, and understanding of the situation. Not everyone understand what it's like to be on my side of the table, and will understand to not send bug reports. It's not your responsability to distribute this dll. All what this does is complicate my life.

If people didn't listen to MY warnings, and warnings in the game about possible issues, as well as every other modders warning on this, how do you even expect they'll listen to yours? How do you expect they won't come back to me? Really? Get real.

If I had known my license would be used against me, I would have used a restrictive license. I put CC because I thought it would let people help and improve the mod. I didn'T think people would use it to rewind my mod, and distribute dangerous versions of it around.

And to be clear, the Winx64 builds are not really usable. If I can't test on them, don't expect to be able to have a gameplay experience with more than one mod.

Edited October 8, 2014 by stupid_chris

[LuciferNZ]

<snip>

But while it is buggier than I would like, and a damn sight buggier than I'd want to see in a production release, it is at least usable. And for those of us with a lot of mods, it's the only game in town, unless we feel like figuring out how to set up a requisitely-equipped Linux dual-boot partition just to run KSP and kiss multitasking goodbye - that, or try and figure out which 30-40-odd of 91 mods on my must-have list I feel like living without for the next however long. I can't even _load_ x86 KSP without chopping it down that much.

<snip>

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/84203-Less-memory-usage-by-using-OpenGL

Have you tried this Cerebrate?

I ran a fair amount of mods with this, without crashes at all (Other than mod related). You do get a slight FPS hit however, but if you have a monster PC it doesnt really matter.

I found it a good compromise when having to use the x86 versions, and found it a LOT better stability wise.

[stupid_chris]

v1.2.5.1 is up.

Changelog:

October 8th 2014
v1.2.5.1
-Updated to new license

That's about all there is to it. The new license goes as follows:

You are free to copy, fork, and modify RealChute as you see fit. However, redistribution is only permitted for unmodified versions of RealChute, and under attribution clause. If you want to distribute a modified version of RealChute, be it code, textures, configs, or any other asset and piece of work, you must get my explicit permission on the matter through a private channel, and must also distribute it through the attribution clause, and must make it clear to anyone using your modification of my work that they must report any problem related to this usage to you, and not to me. This clause expires if I happen to be inactive (no connection) for a period of 90 days on the official KSP forums. In that case, the license reverts back to CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 INTL.

[BananaDealer]

v1.2.5.1 is up.

Changelog:

October 8th 2014
v1.2.5.1
-Updated to new license

That's about all there is to it. The new license goes as follows:

I literally just got to install the last version...

*flips table, calmly*

[stupid_chris]

I literally just got to install the last version...

*flips table, calmly*

Only the license changed. The mod is the same, except now every new distribution falls under the new license. Only comments changed in the .dll, so no real need to download the new one, the mod itself didnt change.

[BananaDealer]

Only the license changed. The mod is the same, except now every new distribution falls under the new license. Only comments changed in the .dll, so no real need to download the new one, the mod itself didnt change.

I know, I know... Fortunately, this time I don't need to sieve through a huge config file just for the couple lines of RC-related stuff... By far my least favourite part of updates...

[majNUN]

And to be clear, the Winx64 builds are not really usable.

Actually, I wasn't having that many problems using windows 64bit version in 0.24.2, considering this game is still in the making. In fact, the only problem recently I'd have is being able to load my ships from the tracking station (which seemed to be connected to MechJeb in some way). Otherwise, everything was pretty peachy. Is 0.25 that bad?

The two huge, crash inducing problems I had with mods were (1) Final Frontier - because it seemed to mess up the save files, especially when going back to the space center if the flight wasn't finished (nice mod, but not working for me) and (2) having everybody and his sister using different versions of ModuleManager. This last problem seemed to get better after the updating frenzy subsided.

Since all you modders seem to be unionized now, it would be nice if there were some standardization when it came to some things - especially the tweaking business, which has always bothered me. But it really seems like there ought to be some rules about ModuleManager to make it more predictable - keep it at one source and not in every mod file. Seeing how you all are communicating so well, that shouldn't be hard.

RealChute is a favorite mod, but I am saddened that 64bit is not working out for it. I do hope it is revisited in the future.

[NathanKell]

As Chris says (I also had access) 0.25 Winx64 is far, far, far less stable than 0.24. If it had been as stable as .24, we almost certainly would not have disabled Winx64 support in our mods.

The reason for MM inclusion is because none of us know whether users will use more than one mod; one *never* wants to release a mod that lacks required files.

[stupid_chris]

I know, I know... Fortunately, this time I don't need to sieve through a huge config file just for the couple lines of RC-related stuff... By far my least favourite part of updates...

Not sure to follow you here.

Actually, I wasn't having that many problems using windows 64bit version in 0.24.2, considering this game is still in the making. In fact, the only problem recently I'd have is being able to load my ships from the tracking station (which seemed to be connected to MechJeb in some way). Otherwise, everything was pretty peachy. Is 0.25 that bad?

The two huge, crash inducing problems I had with mods were (1) Final Frontier - because it seemed to mess up the save files, especially when going back to the space center if the flight wasn't finished (nice mod, but not working for me) and (2) having everybody and his sister using different versions of ModuleManager. This last problem seemed to get better after the updating frenzy subsided.

Since all you modders seem to be unionized now, it would be nice if there were some standardization when it came to some things - especially the tweaking business, which has always bothered me. But it really seems like there ought to be some rules about ModuleManager to make it more predictable - keep it at one source and not in every mod file. Seeing how you all are communicating so well, that shouldn't be hard.

RealChute is a favorite mod, but I am saddened that 64bit is not working out for it. I do hope it is revisited in the future.

To answer your question: yes, 0.25 is much worse. Bad enough that Squad feels the need to add "(unstable)" to the store downloads. Bad enough that I can't test my mod for thirty minutes straight without crashing. Bad enough that even on stock, I couldn't even play without crashing at innoportune moments.

As for ModuleManager, it doesn't matter how many .dlls there is. ModuleManager analizes the loaded versions, and only runs one of the most recent .dll. You could have five different MM2.5 in your gamedata folder and still only one would run.

And for the last part, address that complain to Squad. They deem the builds to be unstable, and they shouldn't be public. I'm not going to deal with the stock bugs being reported as bugs in my code. Not again. 0.24 showed us all how bad it gets. If Squad had put it's pants as it should have, we would not be having this conversation, because there wuold be no 64bit build you might play on. Trust me, you are far, far, far better off on the 32bit build. Hell, the 64bit build crashes /below/ 3.5G of ram. It's not better because it's 64bit. Maybe on paper it can run more ram and more mods, but in reality, it doesn't. It really doesn't, you'll run better on 32bit, trust me.

[S1gmoid]

That's all cool, you can do whatever you want for yourself. However, distributing is not right, because not everyone has your experience, knowledge, and understanding of the situation. Not everyone understand what it's like to be on my side of the table, and will understand to not send bug reports. It's not your responsability to distribute this dll. All what this does is complicate my life.

What an idiotic reason to go closed.

Where would we be if Linus Torvalds thought like you...

[stupid_chris]

What an idiotic reason to go closed.

Where would we be if Linus Torvalds thought like you...

The license is literally the same, except you need my permission to release.

If you don't like it, don't use RealChute, it really does not matter much to me. In the meanwhile, I don't think telling a modder his judgement is "idiotic", especially in the case where that modder is a moderator, is a good idea at all.

[helaeon]

Found a bug in Agents.cfg

Path for the agency logos is incorrect and prevents a new save from generating contracts.

says "Squad/Agencies/..." rather than "RealChute/Agencies/..."

Changed it on my install and it fixes things right up.

Edited October 8, 2014 by helaeon
Wanted to note that I tested change locally

[stupid_chris]

Doh. That'll learn me to copy paste.

Thanks, will note it down.

[S1gmoid]

The license is literally the same, except you need my permission to release.

If you don't like it, don't use RealChute, it really does not matter much to me. In the meanwhile, I don't think telling a modder his judgement is "idiotic", especially in the case where that modder is a moderator, is a good idea at all.

Whatever man. If you want to take it that way, feel free to delete my comment.

I don't know how much e-mail you are getting, but it just feels super petty to abandon the whole OSS idea because of support requests about unsupported installs.

It's nothing personal, I just think the world already has a lot more restrictive licenses than it really needs.

Edited October 8, 2014 by S1gmoid