[cod] Any info on a new patch?

Thu Jan 20 22:48:33 EST 2005

Even if I had not read the instructions, I would not make such a mistake.
I would have still done it the same way. Simply, you always patch the main
code base before the "add-on".  COD upgrades to 1.5 base before a MOD add on
United Offensive upgrades to 1.5.1.  Makes sense..

For siq,  I really doubt that all of us are imagining these crashes, as the 
error logs are real,
as are the recent bugs referenced in the thread posted by "bits". I have 
seen the
errors they refer to, and this is part of the TDM problem, so I guess I was 
not imagining it,

See:  http://www.iwnation.com/Forums/index.php?showtopic=12337

Here is the Zip to fix 
em:  http://www.iwnation.com/Forums/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=108705

(Thanks Jay for those links. Using yours, I grabbed the ones above)

This really bothers me.  If you read the post, and look at the code 
fragments, you really have to wonder about the QA process.  They are not 
"gotcha" type mistakes on boundary checking, they are lazy
copy and paste type mistakes.  It is sloppy, slop. Simple as that.

As to why many have trouble and you are not?  Who knows.  But for certain, 
enough of us are having the problem, that it is real. THe fact that I see 
the problem on FreeBSD, RH9 and my hosted servers (RH ES 3.0, updated with 
the latest version via up2date RHN subscription, tells me it is not likely 
specific to the Linux distribution, or Ryan's code interpreter (which is 
really what his Linux program is...

I would just like to see this fixed before UO gets more serious 
competition.  There is a lot of similar
FPS's coming out in 2005 that are claiming to "top" COD.  I don't think 
anyone expected EA to do
it with MOH PA (how unfortunate), but some titles look like they have the 
potential.

First on the horizon is 2/25/05.

Mark D

At 08:19 PM 1/20/2005, you wrote:
>  POSSIBLY THOSE THAT DO NOT UPDATE ORIGINAL C.O.D. TO 1.5 BEFORE PATCHING 
> C.O.D.U.O  TO 1.51...
>
>i was guilty of this and experienced lag issues and several random freezes 
>_ as well as unable to download from servers on a random basis -- 
>depending on where the .pks originated from --ie: main or uo --
>
>   ok ill go back under my desk 
> now....<http://home.comcast.net/~koviatt/crashsgarage.html>crash(mtl) out !!
>
>
>Psalms 118:8
>"It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man."
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <mailto:gitman at gmail.com>Geoff Goas
>To: <mailto:cod at icculus.org>cod at icculus.org
>Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 3:36 PM
>Subject: Re: [cod] Any info on a new patch?
>
>i get random crashes but not very often... i suspect its just people
>exploiting the exploit.
>
>
>On Thu, 20 Jan 2005 14:24:22 -0800, Siq 
><<mailto:siq at sbcglobal.net>siq at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I keep hearing of people complaining about random crashes but I have yet to
> > have either of our two servers crash since 1.51 came out.  We run a BAS/DOM
> > server and a DM/TDM/HQ server and they both are rock solid.  Lag is another
> > issue altogether.  We even run AWE mod on the DM/TDM/HQ server and still no
> > crashes.  There either has to be a config file problem or you have a 
> bad pk3
> > somewhere.
> >
> >
> >
> > Siq
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> >
> >
> > From: Mark J. DeFilippis [mailto:defilm at acm.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 4:33 AM
> > To: <mailto:cod at icculus.org>cod at icculus.org
> > Subject: Re: [cod] Any info on a new patch?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Was Steve's thread just "Hijacked"? or am I missing part of the list?
> >
> > Was there ever a simple confirmation?  Even with the latest PB patches,
> > we still see crashes as well.  It always appears to be during a TWl or OGL
> > match!
> >
> > Murphy's law.  I can run foy 24x7 full all day long on CTF, and have a
> > dedicated server for it.
> > But TDM is "Death", and appears to crash more than any other game type for
> > some reason,
> > and particularly in Arnhem.
> >
> > I was hoping the latest pb update would do it, but there are clearly more
> > issues here
> > as logs have shown.
> >
> > I didn't think an "ack" was much to ask for on a patch.  If the "official
> > release" Ryan speaks of is the "current" windows patched 1.51b version, I
> > will be very disappointed. I doubt I will be alone.
> > "Yea! Lets have a party for the official release of the latest broken
> > version".  "Feels like Windows... should be Linux".
> >
> > D
> >
> >
> > At 10:20 AM 1/17/2005, you wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > I agree, just a simple confirmation as to what is being done, what issue(s)
> > are being address would be nice to see!
> >
> > Kind Regards
> > Luke Antins
> > --
> > [Firestorm Games]
> > <http://www.firestorm-games.net/>http://www.firestorm-games.net/
> >
> > On Mon, 17 Jan 2005, Ian mu wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yup still seeing crashes even since the latest pb release as well
> > which we thought were responsible for some.
> >
> > Just a confirmation its being looked at would be a start as haven't
> > heard a lot so far, or if more information or logs need posting etc.
> > or help needed with tracking it down.
> >
> > 
> S1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Mark J. DeFilippis, Ph. D EE          <mailto:defilm at acm.org>defilm at acm.org
> > 
> <mailto:defilm at ieee.org>defilm at ieee.org
> >
> >
S1-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark J. DeFilippis, Ph. D EE          defilm at acm.org
                                       defilm at ieee.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://icculus.org/pipermail/cod/attachments/20050120/84bacd84/attachment.htm>