PDA

View Full Version : File Size and Date Mismatch Problems



XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:51 PM
A 1.11 patched version from 1.1F
A 1.11 patched version from 1.1B
A 1.11 patched version from 1.0 (Box)

Should all yield the same files and file sizes, and dates, right?

They don't.

There is a discrepancy in patch111_update.exe.


The fb_3do03.SFS in patch111_full.exe:

09/03/03 402,708 bytes

This is different if you're upgrading from 1.1F or 1.1B as this file is not found in the archive.

Therefore, people using *_full.exe are getting a different fb_3do03.SFS file over those upgrading from 1.1F or 1.1B.

??

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:51 PM
A 1.11 patched version from 1.1F
A 1.11 patched version from 1.1B
A 1.11 patched version from 1.0 (Box)

Should all yield the same files and file sizes, and dates, right?

They don't.

There is a discrepancy in patch111_update.exe.


The fb_3do03.SFS in patch111_full.exe:

09/03/03 402,708 bytes

This is different if you're upgrading from 1.1F or 1.1B as this file is not found in the archive.

Therefore, people using *_full.exe are getting a different fb_3do03.SFS file over those upgrading from 1.1F or 1.1B.

??

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 07:58 PM
I know this is confusing.
To clarify:

Joe installed 1.0 from CD
Patches with 1.1F FULL (the bad one)
Patches with 1.1F - 1.11

Jane installed 1.0 from CD
Patches with 1.0 - 1.11 (the big patch 1.11 exe)

These two folks should have the same files.
They do not.

Joe has an old fb_3do03.SFS file with an smaller file size.
Jane has fb_3do03.SFS with a newer date and larger file size.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 08:46 PM
could explain why one user says sound is porked and another says sound is great?

S!
609IAP_Recon

Forgotten Wars Virtual War
Forum: http://fogwar.luftwaffe.net/forums/index.php
Website: http://forgottenwars.dyndns.org
Visit 609IAP at http://takeoff.to/609IAP

http://www.leeboats.com/609/sig/609_recon3.jpg

Agnus Dei, Qui Tollis peccata mundi, Miserere nobis. Dona nobis pacem

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 08:48 PM
Not sure on that.
mg_sound.dll, dated 08/2003 contains the sound code.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 09:35 PM
The reason is simple.

The updated doens't updated some of the file because they where OK.

The full updated all the patch because they are updating the version from the CD, witch needed to be updated.

There is no difference between both type of install for the patch.

________________________________________
Emmanuel-Yvan."A.Zel1st" Ofoé
Lead Tester Ubi Soft Entertainment
email: eyofoe@ubisoft.qc.ca

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:17 PM
Azazel1st, I respectfully disagree.

The installation routine is WinZIP SFX.

It's just a smart ZIP file.
It has no way of determining the state of files before it dumps the contents into a directory.

I just tested again, with a fresh install of FB 1.0, and a 1.1F patched fresh install of FB 1.0.

The file mentioned above is not only a different date, it is a different size.

Don't mean to come across brash, but I'm running 2 versions of 1.11.

They have different timestamps/filesize of the file mentioned above.

This is odd.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:20 PM
I do want to clarify that I'm not trying to make trouble; nor am I suggesting that these discrepancies cause a problem, but it is cause for concern; at least to me, anyway.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:20 PM
Hi there Emmanuel, I've been meaning to have a little chat with you for some time now.

I was wondering if you could take a look in the thread over in the General Discussion forums, at the thread titled "post 1.1f bugs here". Could you give us your opinion on which of those bugs remain, in your testing experience?

Do you know if UBI / Maddox / UBI testing use MD5 or similar checksums to verify that everyone is in fact using the same files for testing or release purposes?

Could you enlighten us as to the hardware and driver testing range UBI QA used to verify that there are definitely no more sound bugs in version 1.11 of FB?

Many thanks for whatever information you are able to share with us.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:26 PM
Tolwyn, you'll notice how the various patches - 1.0b, 1.1f, 1.11 - all use a system of additive naming. You get file01, file02, file03 in your root IL2FB folder.

I don't disbelieve Emmanuel when he says that these files would differ depending on which patch you're upgrading from. Makes sense.

If you've played with a game like say, Quake, or Neverwinter Nights, think of it like this: in Quake, you have a file called id1.pak which contains all the data files needed for the game. This is a modular file that contains subfiles read by the game. If you place a file of the same name as one of those subfiles in the same directory as the id1.pak file, it'll override the file in id1.pak and use the file.

Or neverwinter nights, with its "override" directory for patching / modifications.

I think this is what Emmanuel is trying to say.

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 10:31 PM
Right. I think I get what you're saying.
I need to check the other files 01, 02, etc. to see if they are different, too.

You're saying that, for example, 02 is differnet to, and contains the "missing data" that 03 doesn't have, when comparing all those files together?

Like I said...
I didn't mean to claim that there was a "problem." However, I do see this as just cause for a little confusion, if not concern.

Aggregately, all the "data" is there, just in different files?

I still don't like that! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:07 PM
Here's what concerns me:

1.0 - 1.1F - 1.11

fb_3do02.SFS - 23,042 KB - 08/06/2003
fb_3do03.SFS - 269 KB - 08/27/2003

1.0 - 1.11 Full Patch
fb_3do02.SFS - 23,042 KB - 08/06/2003
fb_3do03.SFS - 394 KB - 09/03/2003

??

You would think, if the above suggestion were true, that fb_3do02.SFS might be different as well; but they are not. The are identical, bit for bit.

The first fb_3do*.* file is from the CD and hasn't changed.

So, what is in the missing 135 KB?? (or the "extra" 135 KB, depending upon your point of view).





Message Edited on 09/08/0303:10PM by tolwyn.com

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:21 PM
Bump.

By the way, I used to edit:

PWADs, PAK files, PK3 (winzip) files for those games! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Doomsday now supports PK3 files finally!

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2003, 11:30 PM
Interesting :>

This is why I asked if UBI use MD5s or some other way to verify that they're all using the right data and program builds. From the 1.1f fiasco, I assume they don't, which is not just an extremely silly way to go about testing, it's also unprofessional as all hell.

This file size difference would also seem to support that theory.

Thanks for the work - don't have 1.11 installed myself yet.

Definitely something that needs answering, hopefully before too many more people download the 'really, seriously, fixed this time' 1.11.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:28 AM
I wouldn't use unprofessional; I'd use unconventional.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 02:01 AM
bump

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 11:06 AM
Hi Tolwyn,

I noted your observations before downloading the 1.11 patch. As a result I bagged both the 1.11_update and 1.11_full. After checking the contents of the archives I opted to just lay 1.11_full right over the 1.1F install that was in place.
If it broke I'd have just re-installed - but all seems fine - the extraction overwrites all files of the same name anyway so I didn't see any harm in the overlap.
In this case the different versions appear to be merely a convenience for users with limited internet connections.

This doesn't resolve why the file sizes and dates would be different between patch types - but using the full 1.11 patch appears to make it a non-issue (for me anyway /i/smilies/16x16_robot-happy.gif ).

Cheers

Athos

"When first under fire and you're wishful to duck, don't look nor take heed at the man that is struck, be thankful you're living, and trust to your luck, and face to your front like a soldier"
ex. Rudyard Kipling

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 11:45 AM
One other interesting little fact that comes out of this is that obviously FB does no size consistency checking of files.sfs.

In fact I was able to drop in various patches files.sfs into 1.1f and 1.11. files.sfs obviously does a lot of things to the game if it's all that's different between 1.1f and 1.11.

Anyone tried changing these files in multiplayer games and seeing what happens?

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 12:40 PM
I did just the update from 1.1F, then I heard about the file date and size difference.

I downloaded the full updater and checked each file property versus the currently installed ones. All files EXCEPT 3dfs03 were identical.

This isn't an updater or installer, just an unzip and overwrite.

If all files are the same but this one has less bytes and an earlier date, there's no way it has the same contents.

I just copied the newer file from the full installer (you could just unzip the full upgrade over top too). It works fine (in fact, I think it might be working better, but that could just be my wishful thinking).

Jet

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 05:44 PM
Athosd wrote:
- In this case the different versions appear to be
- merely a convenience for users with limited internet
- connections.

Certainly; except that you get 2 different versions of the file fb_3do03.SFS if you update from 1.1F than you would if you updated with 1.11 Full.



I am not saying this "affects" anything in the game. Oleg has been notified and is looking into it, I'm sure. It could be absolutely NOTHING.

I have not experienced any problems.

This is merely a QUESTION and should not be cause for alarm.


Q: What's the worst that can happen?

A: You'll need to download 1 small file (under 300k).

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 06:06 PM
tolwyn.com wrote:
- I am not saying this "affects" anything in the game.

i say it does affect the game.

A difference that has been confirmed by testing is db-3f front windows. Drop the earlier smaller fb_3do03.SFS file into Fb for the view on the left, use the later fb_3do03.SFS bigger version for the fixed view on the right.


http://www.uploadit.org/files/090903-Db-3f-before-and-after.jpg





<center>


http://www.imgmag.org/images/delta9tetra/lurch-avatar.gif



</center>

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 06:27 PM
Hi,

It seems as the only patch affected with this is the one used from 1.1F to 1.11.

I had 1.1b to 1.11 and have the larger file.

Regards H√¬•kan

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 08:03 PM
Thank you for finding the exact issue.

If you've upgraded from 1.1F to 1.11 using the patch available on UBI Soft and its mirrors, and if this cosmetic issue bothers you, then download the full 1.11 update (ugh!).

Otherwise you will likely not suffer any terrible consequences as far as server-client compatibility or any other "bugs" fixed with any version 1.11 patch.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 08:08 PM
Hi,


Could someone please post the newer 3do file for those of us with by dialup?


Thanks,


Greg S

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2003, 08:09 PM
I would wait for an official version of this one file.
I personally don't want to circumnavigate 1C on this.