I have very limited experience with Wine, but if I understand correctly it runs entirely in user space. As such, any sockets that are opened by a Windows binary and not closed properly by it (or Wine) will presumably be freed up instantly if you simply kill Wine, no? (For sure there may be an even simpler answer of course.)
Wow! That would make a lot of people very happy, yourself included no doubt
After all these years, it somehow feels a bit more real now that you've mentioned it so casually.
Fingers crossed it's soon (LFS is still my favourite sim in many ways).
Wow, long-lived thread
You've managed to do all of the ones I was thinking about already.
I guess maybe it's too late to start now but having the reference links in the OP would be cool.
(NB: in case it wasn't a pun that sailed over my head, it's Assetto Corsa & assettocorsa.net, not Corsica
)Very best of luck with it!
You're certainly due some better luck at this stage...
You're certainly due some better luck at this stage...
Is the injection detected by the AVs through your use of a particular system call, or would it need actual code analysis of some kind? (Just curious!)
Yeah, that sucks. My folder only has a LFSLazy.stats file, no sign of statsv2, but maybe that's somewhere else. (I haven't played LFS for about 9 months though, which may mean I'm out of date 
)
The .stats file is binary so might be rather tricky to rescue it with an editor I guess.
Maybe you have "previous versions" available if you right-click on the file, or a backup...
)The .stats file is binary so might be rather tricky to rescue it with an editor I guess.
Maybe you have "previous versions" available if you right-click on the file, or a backup...
You could instead perhaps code it not for a fixed centre point, but to adaptively hug the sides of the screen, sliding across/up at each new angle until the non-transparent pixels are within N pixels of the boundary in both X and Y directions... (if that is reasonably clear
)Yup, this is the crux. The list of suggestions is outrageously long, and thus Scawen can be forgiven if he doesn't read it regularly.
But... the fact that unrelated improvements suggested** in the patch test threads are often implemented promptly is basically Scawen making a rod for his own back.
No disrespect intended
and many of the improvements are hugely welcome but so would be many of those in the suggestions forum...** (which may strictly be against the rules anyway?)
Mmm, breathing life into LFS is good, of course, but some of us (quite a lot of us?) simply have no interest in drifting.
So a suggestion for Scawen, if he's feeling indulgent about improving life for drifters (and thereby increasing their numbers): give the rest of us a way to avoid seeing a shedload of drift servers when we check LFSW, the same way we can exclude cruise
So a suggestion for Scawen, if he's feeling indulgent about improving life for drifters (and thereby increasing their numbers): give the rest of us a way to avoid seeing a shedload of drift servers when we check LFSW, the same way we can exclude cruise
Yes, it is smarter - not just RPM-based. I believe we discussed this (much) earlier in the thread, no?
AFAIK, the built-in uses the "correct" shift point based on the torque curve and knowledge of the gearbox ratios. No idea if it uses a modified torque curve as the altitude varies, but I strongly suspect that the torque curve varies quite a lot with engine restriction and that would be pretty important for the shift points...
I'm baffled. Reading your earlier post, you seem to be suffering from both issues - sometimes it shifts twice, sometimes not at all.
When you say "It makes no effect", do you really mean that if you set it to the maximum (can't recall how big that is, but pretty damn big, I thought) you can still shift twice within that delay? This would imply that the delay isn't working at all.
When you say "It makes no effect", do you really mean that if you set it to the maximum (can't recall how big that is, but pretty damn big, I thought) you can still shift twice within that delay? This would imply that the delay isn't working at all.
That sounds exactly like a switch bounce problem (so you should try the gearshift debounce delay).
(What's the point of a revbouncer? Edit to clarify: having googled, I understand *what* it does but I don't know why anyone would bother.)
I am now unable to remember the exact issues I had
I think one issue was it not scrolling: now fixed, yay, thanks!
Second issue remains, but less critical, which is that the messages display in a huge, wide box which is mostly empty, containing teeny tiny text which often fits onto one really long line, instead of a nice-sized font which wraps onto a few lines. But maybe my phone sucks
I think one issue was it not scrolling: now fixed, yay, thanks!
Second issue remains, but less critical, which is that the messages display in a huge, wide box which is mostly empty, containing teeny tiny text which often fits onto one really long line, instead of a nice-sized font which wraps onto a few lines. But maybe my phone sucks
I've noticed something truly weird on several occasions with my G27, but it's intermittent and so I've never been able to work out a cause and have therefore never reported it. However, this post makes me wonder if it's connected...
Now and then when I pull the paddle to shift, mostly (always?) up-shifts, I get a brief raise in the revs but no up-shift - rather like a botched manual shift where the clutch wasn't down fully and the driver couldn't mechanically pull the gear lever across. The revs clearly respond so the program has noticed a button press...
It has probably happened maybe 20 times in total, spread over many months.
My previous wheel had a switch bounce problem (fixed by replacing a faulty switch) on down-shifts (lethal to engine) but I was able to mitigate that somewhat by using the debounce delay option. Very clearly a wheel issue, unlike the weirdness on my current wheel.
This problem is weird and I have no clue about what could be causing it other than a bug...? Surely the game doesn't produce bad shifts if the button isn't down for long enough?
I am not sure it has ever happened in single player or the SPR would perhaps be enlightening. Not certain I ever checked an MPR for it but I guess it would be useless anyway.
Ah, I see, shame. I'll have to make do with the other cool features of Lazy 
Hi Daniel. Just wanted to check if you had noticed my post above?
Needn't be big changes - just enough to let the packet/port recognition spot a signature, and probably only needed in the connection sequence... Who knows, perhaps ISPs even publish ways for game devs to be traffic-management-friendly?
Switching protocol is a way to cope somewhat better with bad ISP behaviour but it certainly isn't as good as curing it at source.
Switching protocol is a way to cope somewhat better with bad ISP behaviour but it certainly isn't as good as curing it at source.
Hmm, this reminds me that I had issues with my old ISP Plusnet (a pretty major ISP in the UK) because they used traffic management. They had systems to prioritise gaming traffic but although they genuinely tried to fix the problem for me, they simply couldn't find a way to make LFS packets work in the evenings when the net was congested. I think there was something about the ports/packets not being adequately consistent (or recognisable?) for their systems to identify the traffic as gaming.
Other gamers (e.g. COD etc.) reported no issues with Plusnet at the time. (I left them for an ISP who don't have any traffic management.)
If this problem is sufficiently common it might be worth modifying the LFS network behaviour? I know that most UK ISPs these days admit (sometimes proudly) that they do use traffic management...
Other gamers (e.g. COD etc.) reported no issues with Plusnet at the time. (I left them for an ISP who don't have any traffic management.)
If this problem is sufficiently common it might be worth modifying the LFS network behaviour? I know that most UK ISPs these days admit (sometimes proudly) that they do use traffic management...
OK, found it: it's DL_SHIFT in the OutGauge packets.
I'm puzzled about why you'd use RPM instead of the built-in LFS-provided shift light (for cars that have a shift light). Am I missing something?
Well, I found it in the dashboard setup, but I guess I'm still confused (i.e. noobish) about how the Lazy dashboard works. When I enabled it for FXR it was blank, but for the MRT I could see a working dash, although I still couldn't actually see the shift light coming on (but the dash editor did say it was activating at really high RPM).
Hmm, not sure what you mean about shift points set too low - you mean within LFS, or Lazy, or Aonio? What's the symptom you are seeing?
And I have no experience with the auto box...
However, my - possibly incorrect - understanding was that the LFS-builtin shift light operates correctly regardless of restrictions. This is what makes it such a nice thing to use instead of faffing with different RPM for different cars (never mind all the different restrictions).
NB: by "operates correctly", I mean that I think it comes on when the power in the next gear up is higher than the current gear. That's probably guesswork on my part though since I'm not sure I've ever seen that written down anywhere. It does tally very well though with my observations of when it comes on, given the differing torque curves in the different cars (I also drive restricted cars like FX2 quite a bit and the optimum shift revs do indeed differ) and the nominal peak-power RPM for each.
Cool, adding sound would help enormously. When I'm driving I just don't see the little red light in the LFS console. Also, I will have to go looking for the Lazy shift indicator cos I didn't even know it had one
One comment though on the RPM thing: having a simple threshold like 95% of max RPM is probably fine for many cars (e.g. FBM, BF1, FOX maybe, probably GTIs), but in others - particularly turbos like FXR, MRT, and the whole TBO class - it'll be hopeless because the shift point can be much lower. The MRT is a really extreme case (crazy torque curve), where the shift point can be around 65%!
One comment though on the RPM thing: having a simple threshold like 95% of max RPM is probably fine for many cars (e.g. FBM, BF1, FOX maybe, probably GTIs), but in others - particularly turbos like FXR, MRT, and the whole TBO class - it'll be hopeless because the shift point can be much lower. The MRT is a really extreme case (crazy torque curve), where the shift point can be around 65%!
Hey there folks...
Am still getting used to Lazy but it's really great.
However, one feature I really miss from Aonio is the beep on "shift light".
Aonio used to beep for upshifts even in cars without the shift light (at configurable RPM) but I think a version then came out without that. I know a few people have asked earlier in the thread about this but it seems to have fizzled out after a few replies.
My suggestion would be to do it the same way as Aonio - not worry about configuring RPM etc. on a per-car basis, but just beep when the shift light comes on (so LFS is doing all the work really). I have no idea how Aonio figured out that the shift light came on of course but I'm sure Daniel will find a way
Am still getting used to Lazy but it's really great.
However, one feature I really miss from Aonio is the beep on "shift light".
Aonio used to beep for upshifts even in cars without the shift light (at configurable RPM) but I think a version then came out without that. I know a few people have asked earlier in the thread about this but it seems to have fizzled out after a few replies.
My suggestion would be to do it the same way as Aonio - not worry about configuring RPM etc. on a per-car basis, but just beep when the shift light comes on (so LFS is doing all the work really). I have no idea how Aonio figured out that the shift light came on of course but I'm sure Daniel will find a way
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG