LDraw.org Discussion Forums
LDInspector - Printable Version

+- LDraw.org Discussion Forums (https://forums.ldraw.org)
+-- Forum: LDraw Programs (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: LDraw Editors and Viewers (https://forums.ldraw.org/forum-11.html)
+--- Thread: LDInspector (/thread-23882.html)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-09

(2020-02-08, 17:34)Magnus Forsberg Wrote: IMHO, it should be like this.
42023-1 - Construction Crew - Assembly.MPD (containing all three models)
42023-1 - Construction Crew - Dump Truck.LDR
42023-1 - Construction Crew - Excavator.LDR
42023-1 - Construction Crew - Wheel Loader.LDR
Ah, thanks! Smile  Although I had assumed that nowhere the "-1" should appear and the main file containing all three models should be without the " - Assembly", otherwise it could be a secondary model, couldn't it? And as far as I understand the spec, the set name should not appear for all sub-files in an mpd? Summing up, I would have assumed that:
  • the filename is "42023 - Construction Crew.mpd",
  • in this mpd file the first sub-file is the main sub-file named "42023 - Main.ldr",
    • the main sub-file has exactly three part-ref-lines to the three sub-models,
  • the sub-models are modeled each in separate sub-files:
    • sub-model for the dump truck, named "42023 - Dump Truck.ldr",
    • sub-model for the excavator, named "42023 - Excavator.ldr",
    • sub-model for the wheel loader, named "42023 - Wheel Loader.ldr",
  • there may be even more sub-files in the mpd
    • but they are sub-assemblies, not sub-models,
    • and should not appear in the main sub-file.
Is this plausible, wrong or maybe correct?

Anyhow: as LDInspector checks for file-name-structure, sub-file-name-structure, therefore used numbers and so on, I think the differences between sub-models and sub-assemblies have still to be handled by the user and not the program (but as user I never distinguished this before, so it helps me understanding!).

RE: LDInspector - Orion Pobursky - 2020-02-09

Don't get too "wrapped around the axle" trying to get the file structure perfect. I'm sure there will be some crazy edge case that will come along and show that the spec has flaws. The OMR isn't the parts library so the OMR spec is more of a guideline and as long as everything "makes sense" then it's good enough.

RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-09

(2020-02-09, 14:43)Orion Pobursky Wrote: as long as everything "makes sense" then it's good enough.
I'm very happy with that. Smile  And if there is something that can be checked by software, I'm willing to implement it. Smile

RE: LDInspector - Magnus Forsberg - 2020-02-09

Yes OK,

Let me once more emphasis that I'm only voicing my interpretation of the general difference between mpd / ldr / dat -files.
Not the OMR specifications.

Sub-assemblies should be placed in model.ldr file.
i.e. Sub-assemblies to the excavator should be placed in the Excavator.ldr file.

Let me share my version of the set 42023
  • All I need to build the model is there. All the steps from the official BI.
  • And all I need to manipulate the model, if I want to change the angle of the tipper bed. All I need to do is to select the bed and the "parts" that move together with the bed.

RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-11

(2020-02-07, 22:16)Stefan Frenz Wrote: As mentioned above, it is in pre-alpha state.  Angel
There was a bug in configuration saving that prevented a configured web cache path to be loaded on restart. Attached is a fixed version that also includes a "load all images" button in web view to ease part identification.

Please use the updated versions below, this version is kept for discussion history reasons only.

RE: LDInspector - Willy Tschager - 2020-02-11

(2020-02-07, 21:50)Stefan Frenz Wrote: The gui requires JavaFX (see here), everything else is "plain Java" (version >=11).

Yet an additional install. It's not that I'm a hard core linux user. Would a all-in-one be possible.


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-11

Thanks for trying. Attached is an All-in-One-zip for Linux 64 bit systems, only Java>=11 is required. Please unpack to any user directory and start run.sh script. I hope that I integrated all required libs...

Edit: Removed ~8 MB zip with integrated libs as it doesn't seem to work.

RE: LDInspector - Willy Tschager - 2020-02-12

(2020-02-11, 18:57)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks for trying. Attached is an All-in-One-zip for Linux 64 bit systems, only Java>=11 is required. Please unpack to any user directory and start run.sh script. I hope that I integrated all required libs...

Ain't workin


RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-12

(2020-02-12, 7:31)Willy Tschager Wrote: Ain't workin
Oh, I'm very sorry, perhaps some libraries are still missing. Does any message appear? Should I bundle with Java?

RE: LDInspector - Stefan Frenz - 2020-02-13

Hi Willy,

if you could give it another chance, attached is a zip file containing LDInspector and four bash scripts
  • 1_download.sh to download Java and JavaFX
  • 2_extract.sh to extract downloaded Java and JavaFX
  • 3_delete_unneeded.sh to remove no more needed archives
  • 4_run.sh to run LDInspector
Please download the zip file, extract anywhere, in a terminal change to this directory and run the scripts like "./1_download.sh". Scripts 1-3 could be integrated into one single "installer" and with more checks, but for debugging purpose I treat it easier to have all steps separated and without any further checks that may fail by accident. I also tried a "complete all-in-one", but this would be ~180 MB for Java and JavaFX, so it seems not be appropriate to upload this to the forum.

Thanks for reporting and best regards