| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:22 |
|
EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:00 |
|
kahrl joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:48 |
|
werwerwer joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:49 |
|
alexxs joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:03 |
|
salamanderrake joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:08 |
|
Exio4 joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:18 |
|
ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:58 |
|
kahrl joined #minetest-dev |
| 05:22 |
ShadowNinja |
~tell sapier I found an issue with your Android build, see logs for a day or two ago. |
| 05:22 |
ShadowBot |
ShadowNinja: O.K. |
| 05:23 |
ShadowNinja |
VanessaE: It actually conflicted with the map offset thing. I've updated my vbo branch. |
| 05:26 |
VanessaE |
oh ok, cool |
| 05:34 |
VanessaE |
bbl, off to bed |
| 05:43 |
|
grrk-bzzt joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:01 |
|
nore joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:23 |
|
deltib joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:58 |
|
ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:00 |
|
NakedFury joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:20 |
|
mrtux joined #minetest-dev |
| 07:35 |
|
Gethiox joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:36 |
|
tomreyn joined #minetest-dev |
| 08:38 |
|
ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev |
| 09:13 |
|
darkrose joined #minetest-dev |
| 09:14 |
|
kahrl joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:16 |
|
alexxs joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:38 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:03 |
|
ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:36 |
|
Megaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:00 |
|
PilzAdam joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:27 |
|
hmmmm joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:38 |
|
ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:42 |
nore |
~tell sapier https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/1168/files#diff-a2a82fe964a7b85f20cd5239d386184aR2404 <-- you need to change the error message too |
| 13:42 |
ShadowBot |
nore: Error: Missing ">". You may want to quote your arguments with double quotes in order to prevent extra brackets from being evaluated as nested commands. |
| 13:42 |
nore |
~tell sapier "https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/1168/files#diff-a2a82fe964a7b85f20cd5239d386184aR2404 <-- you need to change the error message too" |
| 13:42 |
ShadowBot |
nore: O.K. |
| 13:52 |
|
nore_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:56 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:57 |
|
NakedFury joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:24 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:47 |
|
werwerwer joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:52 |
|
Jordach joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:23 |
|
ShadowBot joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:57 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:59 |
|
Calinou joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:00 |
|
PenguinDad joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:27 |
|
grrk-bzzt joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:31 |
|
salamanderrake joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:40 |
|
Amaz joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:43 |
|
sapier joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:43 |
|
sapier left #minetest-dev |
| 17:43 |
|
sapier joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:47 |
sapier |
~tell ShadowNinja If you meant the exit to os error I think this may be same reason as celerons crash on trying to join with empty username |
| 17:47 |
ShadowBot |
sapier: O.K. |
| 17:47 |
|
konkypc joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:48 |
sapier |
~ tell ShadowNinja for chat beeing usefull to enable I need to find a way to place chat behind formspecs ... this is a bug in regular minetest too but due to screen size it's way more anoying on cell phones |
| 17:48 |
ShadowBot |
sapier: O.K. |
| 17:48 |
VanessaE |
...or if you use Unified Inventory :P |
| 17:48 |
sapier |
btw does anyone have an idea how we can ensure that chat text is shown behind formspecs? |
| 17:49 |
sapier |
basicaly everything using that room where chat may be shown as those lines are fixed size even if there's a single character only |
| 17:50 |
sapier |
I know kahrl or hmmmm did have a fix for it some months ago, thought it was merged but obviously not ... and I can't find it in logs |
| 17:51 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:52 |
|
rubenwardy joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:54 |
sapier |
I'm going to merge #1165 soon any complains? |
| 17:55 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1165 -- Stop wasting time in abm - performance improvement by CiaranG |
| 17:56 |
proller |
test it! |
| 17:57 |
sapier |
#1167 seems to be fine too so it's scheduled for merge too |
| 17:57 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1167 -- Remove goto from Environment::removePlayer by Selat |
| 17:58 |
proller |
also active_object_count_wider not used now |
| 17:59 |
CiaranG |
sapier: If the chat was a lua hud element, instead of part of the GUI stuff, it would appear behind the formspecs ;) |
| 17:59 |
|
PilzAdam joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:59 |
sapier |
but isn't and it seems to be quite a lot of work to change it that way |
| 17:59 |
sapier |
good point proller |
| 18:00 |
CiaranG |
Ok, I thought I could trick you into implementing that ;) |
| 18:01 |
proller |
maybe for mobs mod or something strange |
| 18:01 |
sapier |
nope ciaranG I try to complete some things atm and it's already hard not to stumble into other open issues ... I already have some strange things on my list of "maybe later" improvements ;-) |
| 18:02 |
sapier |
as it's specified by api we can't just drop it without beeing really sure it's not used at all |
| 18:03 |
sapier |
but anyway as that's a 3d loop beeing called within another 3d loop I'm very eager to get it in. Things like that tend to be real performance hogs |
| 18:04 |
PilzAdam |
active_object_count_wider is used by simple mobs |
| 18:04 |
PilzAdam |
and by celeron55's blockmobs AFAIK |
| 18:04 |
|
tomasbrod joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:04 |
sapier |
ok so no need to discuss about it |
| 18:06 |
proller |
no need to calculate it for all abm, maybe mobs must specify flag for it |
| 18:06 |
sapier |
maybe but that's not related to this fix |
| 18:07 |
proller |
spaces not related to your fixes too ;) |
| 18:08 |
sapier |
well proller you can ask ciaranG if he's willing to add that new feature you request to his patch, I'm fine with his changes the way they are |
| 18:08 |
proller |
removing this calculation for all abm exept 2 related to "Stop wasting time in abm" |
| 18:10 |
CiaranG |
That would still be a more complex thing to do, because it would break those existing mods, until they set the flag that said they want the _wider calculating for them |
| 18:10 |
PilzAdam |
breaking mods isnt an option |
| 18:11 |
CiaranG |
I'll happily implement that, but it's definitely separate to this, which affects no mods, and just makes the server stop doing the same thing hundreds of times for no reason |
| 18:15 |
CiaranG |
Could be a server option (off by default) to only calculate it if a mod requests it. It can be turned on when the relevant mods are updated. (or any time, if you know you're not using those mods) |
| 18:16 |
sapier |
ok, I don't see a reason why this change should break anything and for my tests it works too. Does anyone know a reason not to merge it? |
| 18:26 |
|
Jordach joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:27 |
|
Jordach joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:37 |
sapier |
ok pushing now |
| 18:38 |
sapier |
~ tell sfan5 did you find out why those version configs don't work for you yet? |
| 18:38 |
ShadowBot |
sapier: O.K. |
| 18:39 |
sfan5 |
sapier: no |
| 18:39 |
sapier |
oh you're here good |
| 18:39 |
sfan5 |
<sfan5> !tell sapier çœ ã‚Š is Japanese for sleep |
| 18:39 |
sfan5 |
did you get that? |
| 18:39 |
sapier |
do you do a 32 or 64 bit build? |
| 18:39 |
sapier |
no it did work for me |
| 18:39 |
sfan5 |
32 |
| 18:40 |
sapier |
strange I can't build 32 bit due to a bug in porting.cpp ... it's quite obviously wrong in there |
| 18:40 |
sapier |
hmm I didn't do a reclone ... I'll try this next |
| 18:40 |
sfan5 |
it probably fails because I don't build in the src dir |
| 18:41 |
sapier |
no it fails because of checking for a 64 bit thread in 32 bit mode ... that function isn't even available there |
| 18:42 |
sapier |
you can check for a 32 bit thread on 64 bit os but not for a 64 bit thread on a 32 bit os |
| 18:43 |
sfan5 |
I meant the winresource.rc thing |
| 18:43 |
sfan5 |
wai.. |
| 18:43 |
sfan5 |
wait...* |
| 18:44 |
sapier |
I'm cloning to a new repo maybe mine works because of old things in there |
| 18:44 |
sfan5 |
does it fail here? https://github.com/minetest/minetest/blob/master/src/porting.cpp#L307-308 |
| 18:45 |
|
EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:46 |
sapier |
yes |
| 18:47 |
sfan5 |
wat |
| 18:47 |
sfan5 |
does your compiler support Win XP SP2? |
| 18:48 |
sapier |
I don't know it's mingw with gcc-4.8.1 |
| 18:49 |
sfan5 |
gcc --version output please |
| 18:49 |
sfan5 |
(only the first line) |
| 18:50 |
sapier |
"gcc.exe (GCC) 4.8.1" |
| 18:50 |
sapier |
not much mor information |
| 18:51 |
sfan5 |
oh your are building on windows? |
| 18:51 |
sfan5 |
mine is: ''i586-mingw32msvc-gcc (GCC) 4.2.1-sjlj (mingw32-2)'' |
| 18:51 |
proller |
wider_unknown_count always = 0 |
| 18:51 |
proller |
wider_known_count always = 27 |
| 18:51 |
sfan5 |
well |
| 18:51 |
proller |
last += active_object_count_wider += wid == always 0 |
| 18:51 |
sfan5 |
sapier: seems like your compiler does not support win xp sp2 |
| 18:52 |
sapier |
it's what mingw did install |
| 18:52 |
sfan5 |
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/ms684139(v=vs.85).aspx |
| 18:52 |
sfan5 |
Minimum supported client Windows Vista, Windows XP with SP2 |
| 18:52 |
sfan5 |
support = having the headers for it |
| 18:53 |
sapier |
I guess it's more about the defined minimal windows version then about the header |
| 18:54 |
sfan5 |
no |
| 18:54 |
sfan5 |
the windows minimal version if defined |
| 18:55 |
proller |
sapier, |
| 18:55 |
proller |
22:52:55: ACTION[ServerThread]: singleplayer [127.0.0.1] joins game. |
| 18:55 |
proller |
22:52:55: ACTION[ServerThread]: singleplayer [127.0.0.1] joins game. List of players: |
| 18:55 |
proller |
wtf ? |
| 18:56 |
sapier |
duplicated message |
| 18:56 |
proller |
can you run game once per week to test your changes ? |
| 18:56 |
sapier |
you already complained about that one weeks ago, it's non critical so I didn't fix it yet |
| 18:58 |
sapier |
but thanks for reminding about it |
| 18:58 |
proller |
if you broke something - its critical to fix it |
| 18:59 |
sapier |
if it's as less as a duplicated log message for something where an additional fix is already scheduled I guess it's fine to fix both at once |
| 19:00 |
proller |
its for every joined player |
| 19:00 |
proller |
and contains broken player list |
| 19:01 |
proller |
propose rule - every core dev must have running public server |
| 19:02 |
sapier |
doesn't change fact this is cosmetic only of course it needs to be fixed but not critical |
| 19:03 |
sapier |
you know you'd be out by this rule too? ;-) freeminer isn't minetest ;-P |
| 19:04 |
kahrl |
proller: well spotted, the "wider_unknown_count = 0" in the inner if should be "wider_unknown_count++" |
| 19:04 |
proller |
throw me from core then |
| 19:05 |
kahrl |
anyway is it really not a problem that the wider object count isn't updated between ABM invocations anymore? (if I read the commit right) |
| 19:05 |
sapier |
I didn't support your rule I just told you about possible sideeffects you may not have noticed |
| 19:07 |
sapier |
kahrl you could be right about it there might be a corner case if a abm does spawn a entity |
| 19:07 |
sapier |
abm based spawning might be affected if it uses that parameter |
| 19:08 |
kahrl |
maybe ignore the objects in the current block (offset x=y=z=0) when first computing the wider object count |
| 19:08 |
kahrl |
and add the freshly computed active object count (in the current block) to it on each ABM invocation |
| 19:09 |
kahrl |
if we assume the ABM usually spawns entities in the current block, that should be good enough |
| 19:11 |
|
BrandonReese joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:13 |
sapier |
We should add a note to readme about that limitation |
| 19:18 |
sapier |
pilzadam what do you use that parameter for? |
| 19:21 |
CiaranG |
This would do it I think: https://github.com/CiaranG/minetest/commit/d43917e2f1a2d991237a069f0ceba166543f6f31 |
| 19:21 |
CiaranG |
kahrl: well spotted, thanks |
| 19:22 |
kahrl |
I think you also need to set wider_known_count = 3*3*3 - 1 - wider_unknown_count |
| 19:23 |
kahrl |
right? |
| 19:23 |
sapier |
I'm not sure about it, if you can't rely on numbers they're often almost useles :-( |
| 19:24 |
kahrl |
CiaranG: also as proller saw, wider_unknown_count needs to incremented, not set to 0 |
| 19:24 |
CiaranG |
kahrl: I'm thinking about that one |
| 19:25 |
CiaranG |
Yeah, I was about to say, it hardly matters when the unknown count is always 0 ;) |
| 19:26 |
CiaranG |
Yes, either it should be 3*3*3 -1, or the current block's count should be added in on the next line |
| 19:27 |
CiaranG |
Either way would work, I don't really know which is better. One might result in a slightly different guess to the other. |
| 19:28 |
kahrl |
I'm not sure actually |
| 19:28 |
CiaranG |
Theoretically more accurate with the current block included, yes? |
| 19:29 |
kahrl |
yep you're right |
| 19:29 |
kahrl |
do whichever you like better |
| 19:31 |
kahrl |
sapier: you have to guess these numbers anyway if there are nearby unloaded blocks |
| 19:31 |
kahrl |
sapier: so I would say an estimate is fine |
| 19:33 |
sapier |
You're right, I didn't think about that issue ... strange especially if I think about how much work I had to work around those issues for mobf spawning .... maybe because I didn't use that parameter anywa |
| 19:33 |
sapier |
y |
| 19:34 |
CiaranG |
Top 3 commits... https://github.com/CiaranG/minetest/commits/master |
| 19:34 |
CiaranG |
I guess I should squash them. Any more comments first? |
| 19:34 |
PilzAdam |
sapier, I use it to not spawn more mobs in areas that already have a lot of entities |
| 19:34 |
kahrl |
hmm I don't think that formula is right |
| 19:35 |
kahrl |
(I could be wrong though) |
| 19:35 |
sapier |
I never used a total mob limit but a per mob limit so this parameter wasn't of use for me |
| 19:35 |
kahrl |
shouldn't it be: active_object_count_wider += wider_unknown_count * (active_object_count_wider + block->m_static_objects.m_active.size() / wider_known_count; |
| 19:36 |
kahrl |
s/()/())/ |
| 19:37 |
kahrl |
right now it seems like you're adding the objects in the current block twice |
| 19:37 |
kahrl |
with my formula they're only used for a better estimate of how many objects are in the unknown blocks |
| 19:40 |
PilzAdam |
sapier, if there are 10 mobs of each kind, and you have 20 different mobs then you have a problem |
| 19:40 |
CiaranG |
I'm only adding them once, they're skipped in the loop above |
| 19:40 |
PilzAdam |
thats why I check the total count of entities |
| 19:40 |
kahrl |
CiaranG: you add them again in the abm->trigger call |
| 19:40 |
CiaranG |
Sorry, you're right |
| 19:41 |
sapier |
I know but I do use a lot of other parameters for spawning too ;-) |
| 19:44 |
CiaranG |
Ok, I fixed that. I think I'll test this a bit, seeing as it's never actually worked right with that count not being incremented. |
| 19:53 |
|
Weedy_lappy joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:55 |
|
tomasbrod left #minetest-dev |
| 20:02 |
CiaranG |
PilzAdam: your abms only spawn things in the block they're in, right? |
| 20:03 |
|
MichaelRpdx joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:03 |
|
VanessaE joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:05 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:05 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:05 |
|
Amaz joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:06 |
|
Amaz_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:19 |
|
paramzin joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:22 |
|
iqualfragile joined #minetest-dev |
| 20:23 |
PilzAdam |
CiaranG, no |
| 20:23 |
PilzAdam |
it could be a the block above |
| 20:24 |
PilzAdam |
I run it on stone with neighbors air, and spawn it above the stone node |
| 20:28 |
sapier |
hmm maybe the only way to fix this problem is revert it ... :-( |
| 20:28 |
sapier |
can we set a flag in add entity code and only rescan if this flag was set? |
| 20:28 |
sapier |
that's ugly I know but it might work |
| 20:29 |
proller |
фпфшт ыщдмштп гтучшыеуте зкщидуьюю |
| 20:29 |
proller |
again solving unexistent problem.. |
| 20:30 |
sapier |
can you be a little less destructive and give some suggestions how to fix it? that loop is quite crap but it's hard to fix it without breaking compatibility |
| 20:32 |
sapier |
don't get me wrong, it's good if you find problems but sometimes you could provide a little bit more information about what IS the problem and ... in best case ... how to fix it ;-) |
| 20:33 |
proller |
break compatibility. only user of this feature here and can modify mobs |
| 20:34 |
proller |
and count it like old way if it requested |
| 20:34 |
sapier |
it's the only one we know about, I guess you wont bet noone else uses it ;-) |
| 20:37 |
sapier |
yes that's a possible solution but it's gonna require changes in at least two mods changes api and isn't way more clean then the flag ... at least in my opinion ... but I don't use that feature so I'd prefere those who are affected to decide |
| 20:44 |
|
Amaz joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:00 |
CiaranG |
Ok, I have another solution... https://github.com/CiaranG/minetest/commit/70663e7320e0979cbfbf6d48c491011ee3b60b6d |
| 21:01 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:01 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:02 |
CiaranG |
Not 100% accurate - if the abm spawned an entity in a neighbouring block, the wider count would increase as expected, but so would the count for the current block |
| 21:02 |
CiaranG |
It could be made accurate, but I'm not really sure it matters |
| 21:14 |
sapier |
well that flag adds the ugly flag and isn't as accurate as before too not sure if it's really a step forward ... how much time is wasted on a single object count? |
| 21:14 |
sapier |
would it be a big loss of time if we did a complete rescan on any added entity? |
| 21:15 |
sapier |
I assume it's 99.99% where nothing is done (but that's a guess only) |
| 21:22 |
|
rbukin joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:23 |
CiaranG |
I don't think doing a complete rescan when an object was added would be a big deal. That would still need an ugly flag though. |
| 21:24 |
sapier |
true but that's there in your latest suggestion too :-( |
| 21:24 |
sapier |
as I said that flag solution is ugly ... but for now I've read no solution not requireing some flag |
| 21:26 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 21:26 |
CiaranG |
Yeah. Might as well just rescan if an object is added then. |
| 21:27 |
sapier |
this should be as accurate as before or am I wrong about it? |
| 21:27 |
CiaranG |
Well it's already more accurate than before, it wasn't even counting the unknown blocks before |
| 21:28 |
CiaranG |
But yeah, it should be as accurate as possible. Doing the rescan isn't going to cost much. |
| 21:28 |
sapier |
does it do now? |
| 21:28 |
CiaranG |
Yes - 4th commit down: https://github.com/CiaranG/minetest/commits/master |
| 21:28 |
sapier |
the bad thing about this loop was doing it everytime so we still should get almost same speedup as without fixing that regression |
| 21:29 |
CiaranG |
(I'll squash and tidy all this if and when we get to something good) |
| 21:29 |
CiaranG |
Yeah, before it was scanning 4096 |
| 21:29 |
CiaranG |
times |
| 21:30 |
sapier |
now it's most likely something around 0 times |
| 21:30 |
sapier |
well not exactly "round" ;-) |
| 21:30 |
CiaranG |
Ok, I'll make it rescan when there are new objects |
| 21:32 |
sapier |
maybe extracting the scan to a function to avoid duplicated code? |
| 21:32 |
proller |
still fighting... |
| 21:33 |
sapier |
fighting? |
| 21:34 |
proller |
with imagined problem |
| 21:34 |
sapier |
proller I sometimes really wonder where you get all that anger from ;-) |
| 21:34 |
sapier |
or is this just a cultural missunderstanding? |
| 21:34 |
proller |
from merging your changes |
| 21:35 |
proller |
and this too |
| 21:51 |
CiaranG |
Ok, pushed another. So now it's 4095.9999 times faster than before, less buggy, and doesn't break any mod compatibilty |
| 21:51 |
CiaranG |
(subject to me testing it) |
| 21:58 |
celeron55 |
looks like yet another ancient protype-grade piece of code has finally taken it's final form 8) |
| 21:59 |
sapier |
"final"? :-) |
| 22:00 |
celeron55 |
"acceptable to the germans" |
| 22:01 |
sapier |
I don't know that phrase but I take it as positive now ;-) |
| 22:03 |
* celeron55 |
looks at git history |
| 22:04 |
sapier |
well the last one on master requires fixing a regression ... last weeks I feel like people only start reviewing patches once they are merged :-( |
| 22:05 |
celeron55 |
looks like the original code (written by me) was originally the way you're changing it to now but then i decided to change it to the unoptimized version when trying to quickly deal with the dungeon master spawning problems |
| 22:05 |
celeron55 |
(that was 27 months ago) |
| 22:06 |
sapier |
did you find the reason for those problems? |
| 22:07 |
celeron55 |
i can't remember anything from that far back |
| 22:07 |
sapier |
:-) was worth a try |
| 22:08 |
|
michelson joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:08 |
|
EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:08 |
proller |
celeron55, how many kilowatts of power was fired with this code!11 |
| 22:09 |
celeron55 |
in any case 0.3 has always had the optimal version 8) |
| 22:09 |
celeron55 |
proller: think of all the warm air provided to kittens! |
| 22:09 |
sapier |
true you're guilty for increasing global warming by at least some nanodegrees ;-) |
| 22:09 |
sapier |
maybe less :-) |
| 22:10 |
celeron55 |
actually it makes zero difference because if that code wasn't using the power, then it would have been simply used for rendering :P |
| 22:11 |
sapier |
servers don't do rendering :-) |
| 22:11 |
celeron55 |
there are like 5 minetest servers in existence |
| 22:11 |
sapier |
so you admit it? ;-) |
| 22:11 |
celeron55 |
and 5000 clients |
| 22:11 |
celeron55 |
and the clients saved power because their power hungry GPU was idle while the cpu was busy executing that coode |
| 22:11 |
celeron55 |
code* |
| 22:12 |
celeron55 |
so actually you're the ones causing global warming! |
| 22:12 |
proller |
26 servers online!!! |
| 22:12 |
sapier |
*g* ok if you count all those ppl giving up playing minetest because its too slow there are even more saved kw ;-) |
| 22:13 |
celeron55 |
yes, maybe we should add some more power-saving loops |
| 22:13 |
* ShadowNinja |
chuckles |
| 22:13 |
sapier |
*g* right now I'd be more interested in gaining performance for android devices |
| 22:14 |
ShadowNinja |
while(true) sleep(INT_MAX); <-- Best power saver. |
| 22:14 |
celeron55 |
abort(); <- even better |
| 22:14 |
sapier |
we're quite close to playable on almost all of my devices but 10 fps is a little bit low |
| 22:14 |
ShadowNinja |
Hehe. |
| 22:15 |
sapier |
IRC 25 fps is called fluid ... for my tests about 15 are enough to be at least a little bit playable for a minetest style game |
| 22:18 |
proller |
ShadowNinja, 02:17:49: ERROR[ConnectionSend]: Bind failed: Socket and bind address families do not match |
| 22:18 |
proller |
ipv6_server = 1 |
| 22:18 |
proller |
try it yoursel |
| 22:18 |
proller |
f |
| 22:18 |
kahrl |
and what is bind_address? |
| 22:19 |
proller |
02:17:49: ACTION[main]: Server for gameid="minimal" listening on 0.0.0.0:61660. |
| 22:19 |
proller |
default empty |
| 22:19 |
kahrl |
oh ok |
| 22:19 |
proller |
02:17:49: INFO[main]: Connecting to server at [::1]:61660 |
| 22:19 |
proller |
it must listen :: if no bind_addr |
| 22:19 |
proller |
and ipv6_server=1 |
| 22:20 |
ShadowNinja |
Ok, so the default address for IPv6 isn't created properly? |
| 22:20 |
proller |
yes |
| 22:20 |
ShadowNinja |
It uses 0.0.0.0? Or ::1? |
| 22:20 |
proller |
listening on 0.0.0.0:61660 for server |
| 22:20 |
proller |
[::1]:61660 for client |
| 22:20 |
ShadowNinja |
Ah, ok. |
| 22:20 |
proller |
client ok, server wrong |
| 22:20 |
kahrl |
couldn't we retire ipv6_server and replace it by bind_address=:: |
| 22:21 |
proller |
but not ::, in C must use define |
| 22:22 |
ShadowNinja |
kahrl: Yes, but that would require a fair amount of work as sockets, conns, and the like all take a ipv6 bool. |
| 22:23 |
proller |
in6addr_any |
| 22:23 |
kahrl |
proller: I meant let the user define bind_address=:: in minetest.conf |
| 22:23 |
sapier |
conns just passes that parameter there ain't much to do |
| 22:24 |
sapier |
user can already define :: as bind address |
| 22:24 |
proller |
02:24:21: ACTION[main]: Server for gameid="minimal" listening on :::64635. |
| 22:25 |
proller |
02:24:21: INFO[main]: Connecting to server at [::]:64635 |
| 22:25 |
proller |
fail ;) |
| 22:25 |
proller |
connect must be to ::1 |
| 22:26 |
sapier |
hmm guess that ipv6 code requires some rework as it connects to specified bind address |
| 22:28 |
proller |
same for ipv4, you can listen 0.0.0.0 and cant connect to it |
| 22:28 |
sapier |
ok so we've got same bug in ipv4? |
| 22:29 |
proller |
yes |
| 22:29 |
sapier |
It's gonna be hard to fix this for ipv6 .... quite a lot ways to write :: |
| 22:29 |
proller |
02:29:30: ACTION[main]: Server for gameid="minimal" listening on 0.0.0.0:59421. |
| 22:29 |
proller |
02:29:30: INFO[main]: Connecting to server at 0.0.0.0:59421 |
| 22:29 |
sapier |
but we could just translate to binary and check the binary representation |
| 22:31 |
sapier |
all notations have to translate to char[16] = { 0 } |
| 22:31 |
sapier |
or byte{16] |
| 22:32 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:32 |
|
SmugLeaf joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:32 |
sapier |
so two bugs in there 1. ipv6 setting doesn't switch server to ipv6 and second if you specify a bind all address you can't directly connect (independent of ip version) |
| 22:42 |
proller |
no, only second |
| 22:44 |
sapier |
first one isn't there? |
| 22:45 |
proller |
yes |
| 22:50 |
kahrl |
what code actually tells the client to connect to bind_addr? |
| 22:51 |
sapier |
server->start |
| 22:51 |
CiaranG |
If anyone can spot any more problems with #1169 that would be good |
| 22:51 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/1169 -- Update ABM object counts when triggers add objects by CiaranG |
| 22:51 |
sapier |
as of that point the address is passed till socket |
| 22:52 |
sapier |
CiaranG: I suggest letting it settle down till tomorrow and then merge it |
| 22:53 |
|
valgan joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:53 |
CiaranG |
Yeah, I'll test it more tomorrow, I suggest definitely not merging it until I say I've done that |
| 22:54 |
kahrl |
sapier: ah I was wondering how it got from there to the client |
| 22:55 |
kahrl |
but address = bind_str in game.cpp:1140 does that |
| 23:01 |
|
sapier left #minetest-dev |
| 23:17 |
|
werwerwer_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:18 |
|
troller joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:28 |
|
effects joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:36 |
|
Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:52 |
|
smoke_fumus joined #minetest-dev |
