Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jul 11, 2023. It is now read-only.

Add stable release 0.F-3#615

Open
AllenJB wants to merge 1 commit into
remyroy:masterfrom
AllenJB:release_frank3
Open

Add stable release 0.F-3#615
AllenJB wants to merge 1 commit into
remyroy:masterfrom
AllenJB:release_frank3

Conversation

@AllenJB
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@AllenJB AllenJB commented Dec 3, 2021

stable_sha256 values taken from cataclysm-tiles.exe for 32-bit and 64-bit releases.

I noted recent 'number' values in the stable_assets list are using a dated tag, but couldn't see where this comes from / how it's worked out. I used the 'Build Number' from VERSION.txt as older releases appear to do.

An entry in the BUILDING or CONTIRBUTING docs on adding stable releases might be helpful.

Comment thread cddagl/constants.py
},
'0.F-2': {
'name': '0.F Frank-2',
'number': '2021-08-31-2315',
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems that the "number" tag was, like you said, the build number but later was changed to the "Date of release" in a YYYY-MM-DD-HHMM format (CEST -2 time). Where did you find that version.txt file?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In the root of the Windows-Tiles zip files (so the installed game files)

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

Comment thread cddagl/constants.py
'5da7ebd7ab07ebf755e445440210309eda0ae8f5924026d401b9eb5c52c5b6e7': '0.F-2',
'6870353e6d142735dfd21dec1eaf6b39af088daf5eef27b02e53ebb1c9eca684': '0.F-2'
'6870353e6d142735dfd21dec1eaf6b39af088daf5eef27b02e53ebb1c9eca684': '0.F-2',
'3e0b15543015389c34ad679a931186a1264dbccb010b813f63b6caef2d158dc8': '0.F-3',
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Correct me if I'm wrong but you should put the SHA256 for the 64 bit version of 0.F-3, AFTER the x86 one. It seems they are inverted

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

@AllenJB AllenJB Dec 4, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From what I could see of the code (that I saw) that uses this, it shouldn't matter what order they're in - it's a search using the hash as the key and is used to identify the installed version without regard for whether it's 32- or 64-bit.

For the record I'm running 64-bit Windows and using the 64-bit version (installed by removing the constants.pyo file and updating constants.py on my installed copy of the launcher) and it (as far as I can tell) identified the installed version fine (after previously failing to identify it when I assumed the hash was for the file download, not the installed executable)

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, I guess you're right, order does not matter, I guess I should have checked twice; in fact it does work for me too

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants