Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Nightcrawler

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 75
Site Talk / Re: Scratchpad Problem?
« on: December 28, 2015, 07:02:25 pm »
No... You'd leave yourself open to security holes... From the Apache manual for example:

Files can have more than one extension, and the order of the extensions is normally irrelevant. For example, if the file welcome.html.fr maps onto content type text/html and language French then the file welcome.fr.html will map onto exactly the same information. If more than one extension is given which maps onto the same type of meta-information, then the one to the right will be used, except for languages and content encodings. For example, if .gif maps to the MIME-type image/gif and .html maps to the MIME-type text/html, then the file welcome.gif.html will be associated with the MIME-type text/html.”

So, a file named 'filename.php.abc', will be interpreted as a PHP file and will be executed if the last extension is not specified in the list of mime-types known to the web server.

There are of course other ways to avoid this being a possibility. Nonetheless, I choose to do this because I think non-extension related periods are bad filename form (a number of other groups discourage this also) anyway and don't want them here.

That is the desired behavior, we disagree on poor form, and that code is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. ;)

Site Talk / Re: Scratchpad Problem?
« on: December 28, 2015, 12:52:07 pm »
All extensions are checked for validity. Extra periods in the filename not denoting extensions are considered bad form for the purposes of this site. We could probably do things a bit differently, but it's not worth the effort.

So, .1).zip is treated as two extensions and the first was invalid.

Front Page News / Re: Site: Recent Malware Warnings
« on: December 28, 2015, 10:34:46 am »
I think it will unfortunately be permanent. It's the only way the site will pass Google's scan. Since they don't provide a complete list, we can't even just deal with the entries they think are problematic.

I thought about blocking Google Safe Browsing from downloads somehow, but I can't find any relevant information on what IP, hostname, user-agent, etc. they use for this service. I also suspect blocking them might result in an automatic flagging even if I could do so.

Robots are normally blocked from the downloads on this site via robots.txt, but Google doesn't respect that for safe browsing apparently.

Using the registration wall, we did finally pass the requested review. Warnings should start to go away now.

Front Page News / Re: Site: Recent Malware Warnings
« on: December 27, 2015, 04:11:12 pm »
Please by all means contact and harass Google if you can even find any way to do so.

Google in their infinite wisdom, offers absolutely no way to do so. You can do nothing but request your site be crawled again ONLY if you use their webmaster tools interface (which subsequently requires modifying domain host records permanently just for them!). You can't do anything about false positives. ALL downloads are now behind a registration wall and Google has been requested to re-scan. Nothing else can be done as far as I'm aware. Google won't even give a list of all offending links. They merely give you a single example link (which does happen to be the aforementioned http://www.romhacking.net/translations/1590/). It's an absolutely pathetic system. I can't believe Google would put out such junk and push for wide adoption.

Site Talk / Re: Isn't today RHDN's 10th anniversary?
« on: December 24, 2015, 02:09:22 pm »
The 23rd was indeed the 10th anniversary. :) I have been very sick for the past month and still struggling, or I would have done something. :(

Before I got sick, I had the idea of making a little collage page containing a few sentences from various people (whomever was interested) reflecting back on RHDN. Maybe a memorable community moment, how the site may have helped them, something cool they found here, someone cool they met because of the site, etc. I thought it would be cool to have a page collecting various small quotes/tidbits like that to memorialize 10 years of the site and community. I suppose we still could do something like that if there is interest. :)

I have still kept a few memorable images on the server from our early days to dust off on a special occasion...

It's been a long while, but doesn't Breath of Fire IV do this as well? At least I recall getting to play as both the antagonist and the protagonist.

I think it's fantastic that he is able to utilize abilities unique to synthesis hardware that is not possible on real instruments. I think it simply re-enforces the fact that he was a master of his craft! He wasn't composing music to be played on real instruments. He was composing music to be played on distinct sound hardware. :)

Actually, he popped in here for one post last year. Apparently, he deleted his account aftewards.

His account got pruned from the pruning script. If I recall, accounts with no contributions, no credits, no activity for a year, and less than 5 posts are pruned.

I kept in contact with DarkForce until 2006. He was doing well up to before we lost touch (no particular reason, just drifted away).

Site Talk / Re: Public Maintenance on the site
« on: November 04, 2015, 06:44:27 pm »
Perhaps you're right on certain points. I even agree with some myself. Nonetheless, if the majority of people agreed with all of these, it would already be that way. Nearly all of the policies here have come directly from community majority or consensus discussion over the past 10 years. Probably the only exceptions are things that were not done due to technical or resource reasons. There are a number of policies in place that I don't agree with, but as they say 'majority rules', or 'the needs of the many outweigh the needs of a few'. The site was founded and flourished on attempting to balance with community majority consensus.

What is so damned 'sacred' about 'preserving the original archive' if it preserves all the worst aspects of the past rather than what the FOCUS should be on (the rom hack itself).  We should not be so hardcore-focused on preserving the obtuse minutae and utility-wank of the past.

Nothing as far as RHDN is concerned. It's simply community majority consensus. That's a question you'd want your peers to answer for you. The majority of people don't want their stuff tampered with, and have been vocal about that throughout the years. This still appears to be the case today. Perhaps others will back your views and say otherwise, but that remains to be seen. Just the same as you're concerned about aliening visitors, also be concerned about aliening content creators. They both go together.

So, see what your peers think. I doubt the staff would have any objection on changing the policy if many in the community called for it with clear consensus. :)

To All Regarding the Readme discussion:

We were very close to requiring readme files for all new hack and translation submissions a few years back. I'd love to see that. I direct you to resurrect this old topic:

I think it was hung up on some of the details mentioned in the thread and dropped after no further activity.

Site Talk / Re: Public Maintenance on the site
« on: November 03, 2015, 09:15:38 pm »
RHDN needs to update their submission rules to permit 'update' hacks to be uploaded that fix issues like requiring a header or special utilities to be patched.
If we can create a version of something like FuSoYa's Super Demo World that don't require jumping through hoops and only a simple BPS patch then that is something that should be permitted rather than immediately rejected.

To be clear, you would be in favor of someone else updating all of your patches to use xdelta because they believe xdelta to be a superior patch format to the format you have chosen? Or better yet, an RHDN specific format that is even easier yet to apply than both? If so, that is interesting. Most patch authors have historically tended to get very upset over this type of action, hence the majority created policy that exists now.

Site Talk / Re: Data Crystal
« on: November 02, 2015, 08:45:53 am »
Datacrystal used to be entirely separate. At some point some years back, AnyoneEB (the owner) approached me about hosting/merging datacrystal with RHDN. I can't really remember the details, but we both thought that would be a good idea and made it happen! Also, all of the previous admins there became inactive and it was in desperate need of upgrades and maintenance. So, myself, Snarfblam, and Danke spent a good deal of time getting everything up to date and working again in it's current state.

We also integrated wiki links into all of our game pages for ROM maps, RAM maps, tables, notes etc.. See Final Fantasy for example:

Snarfblam, and Danke are the current Admins at Datacrystal now.

Site Talk / Re: Increase inbox size?
« on: October 31, 2015, 04:49:07 pm »
This limit was recently raised to 100! :) Still, please consider keeping your inbox tidy if you don't really need the messages.

ROM Hacking Discussion / Re: Developed new IPS patcher, want to test it
« on: October 26, 2015, 06:31:19 pm »
I don't think that will be an issue if you use Lunar IPS. There are no bugs that I'm aware of after many years of use. I've used it to test my own patching code before, and I've also used it to patch probably 100 games at least. IPS is a pretty simple format. There isn't really much to test.

I would suggest designing a patcher for a format that isn't grossly outdated though. I think it would garner more attention, fanfare, and usefulness to the community.

Programming / Re: SMB1 = Over 99% NMI Routine
« on: October 26, 2015, 06:15:59 pm »
NES games that does most of the work in the main thread does indeed have a game loop, but the amount of time in each iteration of the loop is typically one frame, so there is not what you mentioned (a varying amount of time elapsing between them). The NES is not technologically advanced enough to make such an approach practical.

I think it still may qualifies as far as the game's design goes. You can still use v-sync on modern games, and that doesn't discredit the main game loop's design pattern. Obviously, these games were designed well before established patterns emerged, so they won't fit perfectly.

It's at least similar in concept to what can still be used today. State machines are also a commonly used way to structure a game within a game loop. Either way, I don't see it as that odd of an approach to the game.

General Discussion / Re: Dragon Ball! Opinions! Reviews!
« on: October 25, 2015, 10:11:08 am »
Yet, Thundercats 2011 got cancelled after one season. Better doesn't always mean more people want to watch it I guess. I enjoyed both the original and the remake, and was sad to see it cancelled prematurely.

Programming / Re: SMB1 = Over 99% NMI Routine
« on: October 25, 2015, 10:07:48 am »
I think what you're seeing is a fundamental approach to game development. It's a fixed-step game loop rather than a variable-step game loop. So, rather than running the game loop as many times as possible with a varying amount of time elapsing between them, you run it only once per fixed interval of time. It can make many things about the game logic simpler. This approach can still be used on game's today. The XNA\Monogame frameworks have this option for example. If you use this approach, you are required that your game loop MUST complete in under the fixed interval of time, or you cannot use this method reliably. It's easy for these simpler games to meet that requirement.

Site Talk / Re: Ambiguous Game Select Lists / Feature Requests
« on: October 19, 2015, 02:38:15 pm »
Adding platforms to the game drop-downs has been on the list for a long while now. I was able to button that up and get it done. :) I do not wish to collapse duplicate names.

Interesting idea about cross-sectional searches, but I don't think there is much compatibility there aside from possibly retaining a specific platform or game. Even that would only work on a few sections. I don't see anything else compatible with carry over. Even if they were, you'd have to add search parameters into the session data to make it work, which is not something I want to get into to do that.

It would be nice to have more in depth information there. Noted for the future, but that information is not available at present. It is pulling that information from the submission logs in a generic way across all sections/submissions. Those logs don't have any in-depth information such as the game platform. We'd have to do that whole module in an entirely different way, which we may for RHDN3, but not for the current version. That translation language you see there is an ugly hack I forgot about that doesn't belong there either. We don't want any more of those.

Changing it to 'New Game Entry' is fine and I have done so. We can't add non title text like 'Is The Game You're Submitting A Hack For Not Listed? Add It Here' to the group headings though. However, all associated fields do show ' (Only if game was not found in list!)'.

Site Talk / Re: My browser detects malware in one of the hack's page.
« on: October 19, 2015, 10:22:21 am »
Wouldn't it be better to contact the authors of certain browsers to notify them about false positives?

I've already contacted clean-mx.de, the service that often falsely reports us for hosting virus and malware to our provider (and our provider). We continue to be reported for the same files I pointed out as false-positives.

As far as Chrome, Google offers no way to do this. You can request your site be crawled again if you use their webmaster tools interface, but you can't do anything about false positives. This is a problem for other smaller sites across the web as well if you do a Google search. Firefox uses Google's service for this too from what I read.

They are all overly aggressive and don't care about false positives unless you have a big name behind you.

Site Talk / Re: My browser detects malware in one of the hack's page.
« on: October 18, 2015, 09:47:18 am »
Whilst that would not affect account-holders, wouldn't doing that severely limit the number of downloads off of the site?

A lot of people like ROMhacking.net being the (closest thing to a) one-stop shop for their ROM hacking needs.

Wouldn't doing what you're suggesting cause fewer people to come to the site?

But if it is causing a problem with the provider and is making ROMhacking.net's site reputation bad, then by all means, do what you must. The last thing that this site needs is a bad reputation. ROMhacking.net being a safe and trustworthy site is one of the most important things about it, I think.

It would certainly have some effect on the site, but it's hard to say what that would be. It would not affect any site contributors or forum goers. That basically covers anyone driving the content and direction of the site, so that would be unaffected. I'd rather not do it if it can be helped. I'm going to try to make some new rules with robots.txt and see if that can make many difference.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... 75