 | | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
Good thinking on this, but there is one problem not addressed: duplicate set numbers. For this we will need at least one character to distinguish different sets with the same number. But this puts us over the 8+3 characters. The only character we (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
John VanZwieten wrote in message ... (...) set (...) different (...) only (...) "T7140a_1". I (...) how (...) What if we would consider the content of a duplicate set as alternate models of the same set numbers. Eg. 7140 is duplicate set then, (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) If they're related or not is beyond me, but someone could investigate the duplicates to look for similarities. The duplicates are never in production at the same time, so they are a few years apart at the least. They could be of the same theme (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) Typically, sets with duplicate numbers have nothing to do with each other.[1] So it isn't really accurate to consider one set as an alternate of the other. Steve 1) There are exceptions, where variations of a set are available, such as 6938, (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) Wouldn't adding the year take care of this? Or you could take the pause/lugnet approach: s6938-1.dat s6938-2.dat etc.. submodels of this set could be: s6938-1a.dat s6938-1b.dat etc.. It just barely fits in the 8.3 format, but it would probably (...) (25 years ago, 11-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) Here's a thread on oddities -- sets which "break the rules": (URL) The duplicates are never in (...) Not always, unfortunately. Some notable counter-examples are: 8205 Bungee Chopper Has two instructions booklets labeled "8205-1" and "8205-2"; (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) Is the 8.3 requirement a legacy thing left over from LDraw & LEdit being DOS applications? What programs in LDraw lore -don't- work on longer filenames? --Todd (25 years ago, 12-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) [...] Serious snippage Todd, If you could come up with a complete list of irregulars, it would be helpful. We can figure out how absolutely necessary or how not absolutely necessary a comprehensive file system is that way. If there is less (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
(...) I posted the URL on another node of this thread, but here it is again for convenience: (URL) a list of 238 duplicate set numbers. (...) Bah. Seriously, this is 1999, man. Tough beans for anyone still stuck with Dick's Operating System. DOS (...) (25 years ago, 12-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: IMPORTANT - [ldraw.org] Official Model Repository
|
|
Steve Bliss wrote in message <3761643a.3222363@lu...et.com>... (...) OK, I can see now that is not a wise idea to consideer duplicate sets as laternate models. Ampi ---...--- Imre Papp Geometria GIS Systems House email: ipapp@geometria.hu ---...--- (25 years ago, 14-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LDraw and 8.3
|
|
(...) Hmm. LDAO is OK with long file names, except for a few functions (Copy File is one, I think) which explicitly require a valid 8.3 name. LDAO can be configured to translate long paths/names to short versions before shelling to other programs. (...) (25 years ago, 14-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw and 8.3
|
|
Steve: (...) If you compile them for MS-Win95/98/NT they work with long file names. If you compile them for DOS, I don't think they will (but I haven't checked). Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw and 8.3
|
|
(...) Jacob, Does GNAT-ADA have an option for DOS or Windows compile? When I compiled buildmpd.exe, I didn't look for an option, I assumed it was a DOS compile. BTW, did you (Jacob) receive the buildmpd.exe I e-mailed? Steve (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw and 8.3
|
|
Steve: (...) No, but there are separate compilers for DOS, MS-Windows 95, and MS-Windows NT. (...) Depends on which compiler you used. (...) Nope. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw and 8.3
|
|
(...) Ah. And I have now wiped GNAT off my system, so I couldn't tell which one it was. Windows Explorer thinks the compiled file (buildmpd.exe) is a DOS executable. But long file names are handled correctly, I checked both buildmpd.exe and (...) (25 years ago, 15-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw and 8.3
|
|
Steve: (...) No, but "sparre@sys-323.risoe.dk" is not my e-mail address - even though some of my software clams that. Play well, Jacob ---...--- -- E-mail: sparre@cats.nbi.dk -- -- Web...: <URL:(URL) -- ---...--- (25 years ago, 17-Jun-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
