LDInspector


RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
(2022-03-16, 8:59)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks for re-testing and your report.  Smile This is would match the old installer's behavior.  Sad The new installer should try to download version 17 of jdk and jfx.

Downloading the installer from my website (after clearing caches) should result in an installer containing this line:
Code:
curl https://download2.gluonhq.com/openjfx/17.0.2/openjfx-17.0.2_windows-x64_bin-sdk.zip -o "%mypath%\openjfx-17.0.2_windows-x64_bin-sdk.zip"

If there is still some "bitsadmin" or "13.0.2" in the file, I assume your download link is not the same as mine. Blush  Did you use this one:

http://www.fam-frenz.de/stefan/ldiinst.zip

or another one?

I used that link, but AFAICT this resulted in the old zip. Forcing reload helped and now I see the referring downloads to the 17.0.2 versions.
I will have to test on another laptop if the download of the FX does work now.
Jaco van der Molen
lpub.binarybricks.nl
Reply
RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
While working with LDInspector, I see this in a partslist of my model

   

What does that mean?

One other informative question: what does CS stand for in the partslist?
Jaco van der Molen
lpub.binarybricks.nl
Reply
RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
(2022-03-16, 11:31)Jaco van der Molen Wrote: What does that mean?

One other informative question: what does CS stand for in the partslist?

LDInspector remembers where it has found information about a part and prints them in the partlist as origin. Possible values are:
  • ofc / official: part loaded from a library tagged "official"
  • uno / unofficial: part loaded from a library tagged "unofficial"
  • self / selfcontained: part loaded from the specified file
  • unrsv / unresolved: part is not yet being searched for
  • miss / missing: part could not be found in the current context

"CS" is just "column selected file", and then there are C1, C2, ... as "additional numbered columns".
Reply
RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
(2022-03-16, 12:45)Stefan Frenz Wrote: LDInspector remembers where it has found information about a part and prints them in the partlist as origin. Possible values are:
  • ofc / official: part loaded from a library tagged "official"
  • uno / unofficial: part loaded from a library tagged "unofficial"
  • self / selfcontained: part loaded from the specified file
  • unrsv / unresolved: part is not yet being searched for
  • miss / missing: part could not be found in the current context

"CS" is just "column selected file", and then there are C1, C2, ... as "additional numbered columns".

Ok, in this case it is just good old brick 2x4 part 3001. How is that not official? I have a few other bricks that have that tag too.

As for CS... Ah, OK. Perhaps add a tooltip when one is hovering over such column header that says what said abbrieviation means?
Jaco van der Molen
lpub.binarybricks.nl
Reply
RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
(2022-03-16, 12:49)Jaco van der Molen Wrote: Ok, in this case it is just good old brick 2x4 part 3001. How is that not official? I have a few other bricks that have that tag too.

Hmmmmm, this part should indeed be listed as official. Angel  Maybe the part is inlined in the mpd? Or is the partlist created directly with a file that contains the part? Hmmmm. I'm not sure. If you don't mind mailing me your source, I would like to investigate how this came.

The tool tips will be added, thanks for the note.
Reply
RE: LDInspector Windows installer update
(2022-03-16, 13:08)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Hmmmmm, this part should indeed be listed as official. Angel  Maybe the part is inlined in the mpd? Or is the partlist created directly with a file that contains the part? Hmmmm. I'm not sure. If you don't mind mailing me your source, I would like to investigate how this came.

The tool tips will be added, thanks for the note.

OK, I am sure it is not lined. Or else something really strange happened, alas I cannot find it in the LDraw file.

Occurs with brick 3001, and 3003, 3005 and 3795 too.
I only used official bricks.

I can e-mail you the file (strictly confidential and FYEO) to ldraw at fam-frenz dot de?
Jaco van der Molen
lpub.binarybricks.nl
Reply
LDInspector update
Thanks to Jaco's suggestions now there is a new current version of LDInspector. Main changes are:
  • Added csv export of part lists on Item tab and PartList tab.
  • Added complete export of table on PartList tab.
  • Added sort options on PartList tab.
Reply
RE: LDInspector update
(2022-03-17, 8:51)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks to Jaco's suggestions now there is a new current version of LDInspector. Main changes are:
  • Added csv export of part lists on Item tab and PartList tab.
  • Added complete export of table on PartList tab.
  • Added sort options on PartList tab.

That is quick. Thanks, I will check it out.
Jaco van der Molen
lpub.binarybricks.nl
Reply
RE: LDInspector update
(2022-03-17, 8:51)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks to Jaco's suggestions now there is a new current version of LDInspector. Main changes are:
  • Added csv export of part lists on Item tab and PartList tab.
  • Added complete export of table on PartList tab.
  • Added sort options on PartList tab.

Hmm, this broke my copy. I replaced the old .jar file with this one, ran my usual launcher script, and got this error message in Terminal:
Code:
Error: Could not find or load main class ldinsp.LDInspector in module LDInspector

Methinks I've just forgotten the correct way to install updates…
Reply
RE: LDInspector update
(2022-03-17, 13:41)N. W. Perry Wrote: Hmm, this broke my copy. I replaced the old .jar file with this one, ran my usual launcher script, and got this error message in Terminal:
Code:
Error: Could not find or load main class ldinsp.LDInspector in module LDInspector

Methinks I've just forgotten the correct way to install updates…

Yes, I'm sorry: the packaging has changed some time ago. The start class is now ldinsp.guifx.starter.LDIGuiStarter (so there is "guifx.starter." added and the class name is replaced and now reads "LDIGuiStarter" instead of "LDInspector"). The complete start command should be something like

Code:
java --module-path .:javafx-sdk-13.0.2/lib/ -m LDInspector/ldinsp.guifx.starter.LDIGuiStarter

I hope this brings LDInspector back! Smile
Reply
RE: LDInspector update
(2022-03-17, 13:45)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Yes, I'm sorry: the packaging has changed some time ago. The start class is now ldinsp.guifx.starter.LDIGuiStarter (so there is "guifx.starter." added and the class name is replaced and now reads "LDIGuiStarter" instead of "LDInspector"). The complete start command should be something like

Code:
java --module-path .:javafx-sdk-13.0.2/lib/ -m LDInspector/ldinsp.guifx.starter.LDIGuiStarter

I hope this brings LDInspector back! Smile

That did the trick!
Reply
LDInspector mini-update
mini-update: added progress for collision check to give a feeling how long it will take on big models.
Reply
RE: LDInspector version 0.7
Today I released version 0.7 as current version, main changes since 0.6 are
  • progress-indicator for large models (as in last mini-update)
  • collision detection is multithreaded (not optimal, but faster than single-threaded)
  • upgraded to Java17 and JavaFX17 (solves some GUI-problems)
  • updated/fixed installer (Linux: j/jfx17, Windows: cleanup)
Thanks again for all contributions and feedback.
Reply
RE: LDInspector
If you can't get it running or if you have any suggestions, please let me know.
Reply
RE: LDInspector
Not sure if you're still actively updating, but I notice that the 4.0 license need to be added for OMR check purposes. (Also true for MPDCenter, by the way.)
Reply
RE: LDInspector
Thanks for your message.  Smile I will add the license string I found in LDCad 1.7-Beta-1 as valid and preferred license:
Code:
0 !LICENSE Licenced under CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt

I completely missed  Sad   the official change - and in the official agreement, documentation and examples I still find:
Code:
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
Reply
RE: LDInspector
I'll get the docs fixed.  They're due for an update anyway.
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 7:53)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Thanks for your message.  Smile I will add the license string I found in LDCad 1.7-Beta-1 as valid and preferred license:
Code:
0 !LICENSE Licenced under CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt

I completely missed  Sad   the official change - and in the official agreement, documentation and examples I still find:
Code:
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt

Thanks! And just to note, the string I understand to be current is this:
Code:
Licensed under CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt

It would be worthwhile to add both—unless the OMR will only accept full 4.0 licences going forward?
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 19:57)N. W. Perry Wrote: Unless the OMR will only accept full 4.0 licences going forward?

All new models must use 4.0
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 7:53)Stefan Frenz Wrote: I will add the license string I found in LDCad 1.7-Beta-1

FYI: default licenses hardcoded into LDCad are:

Code:
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL2and4[]="Licenced under CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL4[]="Licenced under CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_NonCA[]="Not redistributable : see NonCAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_NonCom[]="Free for non-commercial use.";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_Shadow[]="CC BY-SA 4.0, see LICENSE.md";

appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL4 is the current LDraw.org official one.

I removed the 2.0 only one in 1.7, but it might still be in people's main.cfg
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 22:54)Roland Melkert Wrote: FYI: default licenses hardcoded into LDCad are:

Code:
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL2and4[]="Licenced under CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL4[]="Licenced under CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_NonCA[]="Not redistributable : see NonCAreadme.txt";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_NonCom[]="Free for non-commercial use.";
const char appDef_LDrawDefLic_Shadow[]="CC BY-SA 4.0, see LICENSE.md";

appDef_LDrawDefLic_CCAL4 is the current LDraw.org official one.

I removed the 2.0 only one in 1.7, but it might still be in people's main.cfg

Oh, that's right—I added my own string to the .cfg to correct the spelling of "licensed". (In Australian English, only the noun is spelled with the -ce ending.) So I have both versions. :-)
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 22:54)Roland Melkert Wrote: FYI: default licenses hardcoded into LDCad are:

Thanks a lot! Smile

Which ones are valid for OMR? I would only allow those for LDInspector to be reported as "valid license"... Thanks in advance!
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-21, 8:06)Stefan Frenz Wrote: Which ones are valid for OMR?

All new models: 
Code:
0 !LICENSE Licensed under CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt

Models with revisions and some embedded parts: 
Code:
0 !LICENSE Licensed under CC BY 2.0 and CC BY 4.0 : see CAreadme.txt

The legacy line may appear in embedded parts: 
Code:
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
Reply
RE: LDInspector
Thank you, next version will accept all and recommend the first one. Smile
Reply
RE: LDInspector
(2023-11-20, 13:42)Orion Pobursky Wrote: I'll get the docs fixed.  They're due for an update anyway.

All relevant docs are now updated.
Reply
RE: LDInspector
Today I released version 0.8 as current version, main changes since 0.7 are
  • Updated license strings.
  • Fixed license line number detection.

Thanks again for all contributions and feedback.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)