BiG World Project for Macs
#21
Posted 16 September 2010 - 08:23 AM
#22
Posted 18 September 2010 - 07:19 AM
A new version of Install-tools is available that's compatible with BiG World Project v9.3 as well as the upcoming v9.4. It's also able to extract more mod archives. Download from the usual place: http://home.comcast....stall-tools.zip
We can still get by with the previous version, too, though, right? After my experiences with updates to this package recently, I'm extremely reluctant to update it again.
Thanks,
Eric
Working and playing on a Mac Pro 6,1 running Mac OS X 10.13.6 High Sierra, and a Mac Pro 3,1 running Mac OS X 10.11.6 El Capitan.
~Buion na 'ell! I serve with joy! Your eyes and ears I shall be. Let us hunt together!~
- Erysseril Gwaethorien: a joinable, romanceable NPC mod for BGII - SoA/ToB, in sporadic development.
A female elf warrior of nature and a Bhaalspawn cross paths during their quests, joining forces to share adventure and companionship. Will they find more?
#23
Posted 28 October 2010 - 02:26 AM
First I noticed a malfunction when running the batch file: The messages from the folder /BWPmods/BiG World Installpack/temp are not read. Instead I got messages like this:
/tmp/87448-bs.sh: line 8: /BiG World Installpack/temp/@81: No such file or directory
However the files named @1, @2, @3 and so on are existing in the provided folder. I assume it is because of its name. How to read them during the installation?
I also noticed I have to do some adaptations to my install.bat for installation on a Mac. That regards the checks at the beginning and the pathnames for Baldur?s Gate. Please let me know if there are more changes to do.
I shortly played BGI for the first time on a Mac OSX! It takes a long time (about one minute) before ?Baldur's Gate II? or ?Baldur's Gate II Lev 1? starts. I thought already, the installation failed. Is this normal?
Also saving and loading a savegame takes a long time. Beside this, the progress bar round the BG icon doesn?t close (it goes only three-quarters if it shows at all)
The walking speed of the avatar is a little slower than on a PC (It is the same machine, except that I started the PC in BootCamp before.
Is this a normal behavior?
#24
Posted 28 October 2010 - 02:55 AM
So something like
cat /BiG World Installpack/temp/@81should be
cat /BiG\ World\ Installpack/temp/\@81in a script -- at least under linux. Don't know about mac and don't know much about bash, either, so there may be some other solutions.
Alternatively, you could just get rid of the @ in the name and adjust the batch-script, that'd solve that problem, too.
#25
Posted 28 October 2010 - 01:30 PM
The definition of variable TXT changed in BWInstallpack 9.5, with a %CD%\ added to the front of the file. There is no variable CD defined so when translated the filename has a / prepended, which looks for the file in the root directory instead of the current working directory. What does %CD% mean?...
First I noticed a malfunction when running the batch file: The messages from the folder /BWPmods/BiG World Installpack/temp are not read. Instead I got messages like this:
/tmp/87448-bs.sh: line 8: /BiG World Installpack/temp/@81: No such file or directory
However the files named @1, @2, @3 and so on are existing in the provided folder. I assume it is because of its name. How to read them during the installation?
You probably want to SET MAC=%IFN% "Baldur's Gate II" since I create a null-filled BGMain.exe so some mods will load, BGT for example.I also noticed I have to do some adaptations to my install.bat for installation on a Mac. That regards the checks at the beginning and the pathnames for Baldur?s Gate. Please let me know if there are more changes to do.
Yep. I assume you have an Intel Mac; Mac BG2 is Power-PC only. MacOSX automatically translates it using Rosetta into x86 code first.I shortly played BGI for the first time on a Mac OSX! It takes a long time (about one minute) before ?Baldur's Gate II? or ?Baldur's Gate II Lev 1? starts. I thought already, the installation failed. Is this normal?
It's probably byte-swapping since all the data files except Chitin.key are in x86 order. And then Rosetta has to add code that swaps it back.Also saving and loading a savegame takes a long time. Beside this, the progress bar round the BG icon doesn?t close (it goes only three-quarters if it shows at all)
I don't know, but it's safe to assume the PC version executes faster than the Mac version.The walking speed of the avatar is a little slower than on a PC (It is the same machine, except that I started the PC in BootCamp before.
Is this a normal behavior?
#26
Posted 28 October 2010 - 01:50 PM
This might be a bit off... but the "cd xyz" is old Dos -command that moves into the xyz -directory if it exists, the "cd..." counters that, so it moves to the level under that and then there's more of those command...The definition of variable TXT changed in BWInstallpack 9.5, with a %CD%\ added to the front of the file. There is no variable CD defined so when translated the filename has a / prepended, which looks for the file in the root directory instead of the current working directory. What does %CD% mean?
For example you can move from "C:\Program Files\Mozilla Firefox\chrome\" to "C:\Pelit\BioShock\Builds\" with these command lines:
cd.. cd.. cd.. cd pelit cd bioshock cd buildsThere is faster/less command lines consuming commands, but I have forgotten them.
Deactivated account. The user today is known as The Imp.
#27
Posted 28 October 2010 - 02:25 PM
Edited by dabus, 28 October 2010 - 02:25 PM.
#28
Posted 31 October 2010 - 09:55 AM
1. The messages from the folder /BWPmods/BiG World Installpack/temp are not read. I get messages like this: /tmp/2141-bs.sh: line 8: /BiG World Installpack/temp/@1: No such file or directory
I thought this is because of its file name (see also posts before). I tried to rename the files to get rid of the @ but the result is the same. But now I noticed that there must be another reason because the files @20 and @21 out from the folder /BiG World Installpack v9.5/BiG World Installpack/English are displayed like this:
_____________________________________________________________________ | | | Welcome to Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4 | | Willkommen bei Leonardos BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4 | | Bienvenido a BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4 de Leonardo. | | >1@> ?>60;>20BL 2 Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4 | | | |___________________________________________________________________| Please choose your language. W?hlt bitte Eure Sprache. Por favor, elige tu idioma. >60;C9AB0, 2K15@8B5 20H O7K:. (E)nglish, (G)erman, (H)ispanic, (RU)@CAA:89 . . .
Then after the player had chosen his language, the respective files are copied into the folder /BiG World Installpack v9.5/BiG World Installpack/temp. These are the files that cause the "No such file or directory" messages
2. As you see in the message above, the cyrillic characters are wrongly displayed. Instead of ">1@> ?>60;>20BL 2 Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4" it should be "Добро пожаловать в Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4" The messages are saved in Unicode for correct displaying. It seems, the translation file ignores it accidentally.
3. I tried to add some lines specific for Mac, however, it fails:
SET MAC=%IF% "Baldur's Gate II"
SET NMAC=%IFN% "Baldur's Gate II"
SET MACIE="..\Tales of the Swordcoast
SET MACIG="..\Legenden der Schwertküste
I got this error message instead:
RETURN to run BiG World Install /BGII - SoA/BGII - SvA/BWPmods/BiG World Install.sh: line 420: syntax error near unexpected token `;' /BGII - SoA/BGII - SvA/BWPmods/BiG World Install.sh: line 420: ` if [[ -e Baldur\'s\ Gate\ II && ! -e %MAC!G%\ GOTO\ :TOBCHECK ]]; then ; fi'
The idea was to add the differing path names and file checks (for the BGII ToB 2.1.2 patch for example) for Mac to the install.bat. Or checks the Mac installer already for the patch?
By the way: As you suggested I changed SET MAC=%IFN% "Baldur's Gate II"
4. The point "M O D S D E S E L E C T I O N" is accidentally skipped by the Mac installer. However, it is displayed quite at the end of the installation after the "Clean-Up" message
At the end: The installation itself works. That's a good piece of work.
Drop of bitterness: On an Intel Mac it takes a long time to load the game (about one minute) and even more time to save.
#29
Posted 31 October 2010 - 05:07 PM
This is as I noted in my previous post: the added %CD% to the file name in 9.5. I'll fix it....
1. The messages from the folder /BWPmods/BiG World Installpack/temp are not read. I get messages like this: /tmp/2141-bs.sh: line 8: /BiG World Installpack/temp/@1: No such file or directory
The message files are in 16-bit Unicode chars, and my scripts run only with 8-bit chars (LANG=C). The message files are translated to 8-bit; the gibberish is the chars that can't be translated....
2. As you see in the message above, the cyrillic characters are wrongly displayed. Instead of ">1@> ?>60;>20BL 2 Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4" it should be "Добро пожаловать в Leonardo's BiG World Mod-Installation v9.4" The messages are saved in Unicode for correct displaying. It seems, the translation file ignores it accidentally.
The error is correct. You mistyped %MACIG% as %MAC!G%. Also %MACIE% should be "..\Tales of the Sword Coast3. I tried to add some lines specific for Mac, however, it fails:
SET MAC=%IF% "Baldur's Gate II"
SET NMAC=%IFN% "Baldur's Gate II"
SET MACIE="..\Tales of the Swordcoast
SET MACIG="..\Legenden der Schwertküste
I got this error message instead:RETURN to run BiG World Install /BGII - SoA/BGII - SvA/BWPmods/BiG World Install.sh: line 420: syntax error near unexpected token `;' /BGII - SoA/BGII - SvA/BWPmods/BiG World Install.sh: line 420: ` if [[ -e Baldur\'s\ Gate\ II && ! -e %MAC!G%\ GOTO\ :TOBCHECK ]]; then ; fi'
and I think you need a terminating ". Actually, BWInstaller.sh works as is; it sets everything up so there's no need to do any special checking.
On the Mac the directories can be anywhere, and you can have more than one (I have four). BWInstaller.sh will ask where they are when it needs them. You'll find this humorous: I set them up as symbolic links in C:/Program Files/Black Isle/BGII - SoAThe idea was to add the differing path names and file checks (for the BGII ToB 2.1.2 patch for example) for Mac to the install.bat.
There are no patches for Mac TotSC. BWInstaller.sh will complain if you're not running ToB 2.1.2.Or checks the Mac installer already for the patch?
I'll check it out.4. The point "M O D S D E S E L E C T I O N" is accidentally skipped by the Mac installer. However, it is displayed quite at the end of the installation after the "Clean-Up" message
Alternatively, you could run the Windows version of BG2 in Crossover Games. It emulates Windows library calls but basically runs native. You'd then also be able to use mods that modify the executable like TobEx and IA (but not the Widescreen mod).Drop of bitterness: On an Intel Mac it takes a long time to load the game (about one minute) and even more time to save.
#30
Posted 01 November 2010 - 03:11 AM
"mods deselection"
"kits selection"
"AI selection"
"rule system"
and goes directly to the "mods check" instead.
I tried to skip the folder checks by adding a line "%MAC% GOTO :SKIPMAC" to the batch because they are only relevant for Windows, however this is ignored completely. The installer forces to start the game instead. This is confusing because of the unsuitable messages @7 about the Name Check and the warning @5 because of failed Name Check.
I assumed you have intended so and it's no bad idea. In this case I should add some specific messages for the Mac instead. However it's a little confusing that one must choose the BG folders again while restarting the installer.
With my batch file the installation runs on Windows from the beginning to the end without any interruption. Therefore the pathnames are stored in the batch file. Until now I could not manage the same on Mac. When installing BGT the installation stops and asks for the pathname despite that I had chosen the BG folder at the beginning. Any idea how to solve this?
#31
Posted 01 November 2010 - 03:46 AM
#32
Posted 01 November 2010 - 04:27 AM
Well, that's nice idea and all, but learning those languages to begin with becomes the problem... and then when one platform does a thing one way, as it cannot do it in any other way, the exceptions begin to amount on a install that can and is freely able to choose about 1000 different components. If you have ever seen a large number, then that might just be one of them.I'm curious (now when you've done the work and everything), is there a reason for why you decided to first use one platform-dependent language for Windows and then recreate that work for non-Windows in another platform-dependent language? I mean, presumably a platform-independent language could have been used...
Realistically it might be actually be better to have 1 version that actually works, than 5 of which none actually work... and as this is still in the process of making that final one, as most of the big mods are still under some work.
Edited by Jarno Mikkola, 01 November 2010 - 06:04 AM.
Deactivated account. The user today is known as The Imp.
#33
Posted 01 November 2010 - 05:23 AM
Compared to the work involved of maintaining and developing two separate but functionally equivalent instances, learning a high-level language like Perl (or maybe Ruby) seems like a wise investment to me (I mean, it's not like they're ancient Greek).Well, that's nice idea and all, but learning those languages to begin with becomes the problem...
I was under the impression that was handled by the language itself. You tell it to communicate something to the underlying system and let it worry about the particulars. But even if it's not quite that easy, aren't you communicating with the system is a rather repetitive way (by telling it to run setup file after setup file)? You could conceivably automate this in some fashion and only do the system-specific stuff once (and/or have some subroutine/macro that does it for you, or something). But I'm no programmer, nor do I have any experience with OSX, so maybe I'm unaware of some complicating factor.and then when one platform does a thing one way, as it cannot do it in any other way, the exceptions begin to amount on a install that can and is freely able to choose about 1000 different components.
#34
Posted 01 November 2010 - 05:50 AM
As said, Leonardo can write basic batch-files, so he started with that and continued to use then.
There were some guys who made suggestions or started to write some test-builds, but if I'm not mistaken, most ran out of gas before they really started.
Speaking only for myself, I'm fine with only providing windows-installations.
Yes, that's not an open approach. But if you see it realistic, you've got over 90% PCs running windows, 5 with mac and 1 with Linux. Mac and Linux have some sort of API conversions/integrations like parallels, crossover, wine, win4linux and virtual PCs approaches like vmware player, virtualbox, qemu and so on.
So I'd guess that 96% of all PC users could do an installation on their machines.
I think it's a better idea to provide a work installation to those majorities if you don't know better.
Getting to know java(script), python, perl... would take some or a lot of time.
If you (someone) wants to do that coding: Go ahead. I don't think that Leonardo or Steve would mind.
Edited by dabus, 01 November 2010 - 06:14 AM.
#35
Posted 01 November 2010 - 07:22 AM
I was mainly thinking about the work that comes after writing the batch file/shell script itself. But maybe they don't need a lot of work once they're written, in which case I guess it'd be no big deal needing to do it twice.I guess porting bat to sh makes some sense since both have the same approach.
#36
Posted 01 November 2010 - 11:59 AM
I did some more testing....Any idea how to solve this?
***EDIT: New version; fixes a problem with running the Fixpack.
Attached Files
Edited by Steve, 01 November 2010 - 03:59 PM.
#37
Posted 01 November 2010 - 01:54 PM
My program is a translator, taking .BAT files as input and creating (hopefully) corresponding Bash scripts. It's written in Bash because it's based on Loriel's TuMac, and I just kept extending it to handle more and more complex scripts.I was mainly thinking about the work that comes after writing the batch file/shell script itself. But maybe they don't need a lot of work once they're written, in which case I guess it'd be no big deal needing to do it twice.
I guess porting bat to sh makes some sense since both have the same approach.
****Note that I updated the attachment in the previous post.****
Edited by Steve, 01 November 2010 - 04:01 PM.
#38 -matt-
Posted 18 June 2012 - 02:49 AM
#39
Posted 21 June 2012 - 12:18 PM