Feature request: revamping config files

Support and general discussion.
User avatar
leilei
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby leilei » Sat 06 May, 2017 12:12 am

IMO I also don't think a configurator program would be useful. That's overblowing featurecreep and going against KISS principles that make PCem already elegant as it is.

Virtualizers that have them need them because they're designed for enterprise users in mind, which is more for a 'everything must be obfuscated strictly to a GUI' kind of sense especially when considering professional corporate technical support. PCem doesn't have to follow this.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 06 May, 2017 3:12 pm

While this conversation is very interesting... has anyone actually tried what I uploaded to that branch?
robertsig
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu 09 Jun, 2016 1:30 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby robertsig » Sat 06 May, 2017 3:26 pm

I cannot compile it, but would love the try the binary. Thanks.
SA1988
Posts: 204
Joined: Wed 30 Apr, 2014 9:38 am

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SA1988 » Sun 07 May, 2017 2:35 am

leilei wrote:IMO I also don't think a configurator program would be useful. That's overblowing featurecreep and going against KISS principles that make PCem already elegant as it is.

Virtualizers that have them need them because they're designed for enterprise users in mind, which is more for a 'everything must be obfuscated strictly to a GUI' kind of sense especially when considering professional corporate technical support. PCem doesn't have to follow this.


Well, right now the configurator in PCem's settings is a bad mess.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Battler » Sun 07 May, 2017 2:44 am

leilei wrote:IMO I also don't think a configurator program would be useful. That's overblowing featurecreep and going against KISS principles that make PCem already elegant as it is.

Virtualizers that have them need them because they're designed for enterprise users in mind, which is more for a 'everything must be obfuscated strictly to a GUI' kind of sense especially when considering professional corporate technical support. PCem doesn't have to follow this.

From what I understood, people have requested some sort of a configuration manager, which seems to be what Sarah is trying to implement, however rather than do it properly, ie. the way all other produces do it, it seems to be getting done in a way that will IMHO limit its usability. Sure, there's going to be a configuration selection dialog at start, but that's about it. Adding a power off ability and making it display the configuration selection dialog when you power it off would be a step forward, it still retains the drawback of making writing any kind of third party manager impossible.
I'd look at Bochs as an example - from what I remember, it has a configuration manager of its own, which I'm quite sure is separate from the emulation core executable, but it also provides a way for the core to be launched on its own.
Another example is Qemu which doesn't provide a manager of its own at all and instead leaves that aspect to third parties.

- SA1988: While I agree the current configuration dialog leaves a lot to be desired, blurting it out like that won't achieve anything.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 07 May, 2017 7:32 am

Yes, because Bochs and Qemu are totally known for being user friendly...

I'd view the need for any third party managers as a bug rather than a feature. In any case said managers would likely still be possible, as I could add command line options to allow that. I haven't yet, as this isn't finished. It's a work in progress. Hence why it's not on trunk. Clear enough?
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 07 May, 2017 7:53 am

SA1988 wrote:
leilei wrote:IMO I also don't think a configurator program would be useful. That's overblowing featurecreep and going against KISS principles that make PCem already elegant as it is.

Virtualizers that have them need them because they're designed for enterprise users in mind, which is more for a 'everything must be obfuscated strictly to a GUI' kind of sense especially when considering professional corporate technical support. PCem doesn't have to follow this.


Well, right now the configurator in PCem's settings is a bad mess.

Well, what's your solution? Any suggestions? Or are you going to continue to just snipe from the sidelines?

If so, can you think of any good reason why I should continue to allow you to post here?
User avatar
leilei
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby leilei » Mon 08 May, 2017 12:21 am

fwiw i find pcem's interface fine as it is as it's similar to another Neko Project II's straight-forward simplicity. The only real difference between that and PCem is that Neko uses smaller dialogs with tabs breaking it up, and less drive image parameter configuration. Neko also doesn't need a launcher.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Battler » Mon 08 May, 2017 2:30 am

leilei wrote:fwiw i find pcem's interface fine as it is as it's similar to another Neko Project II's straight-forward simplicity. The only real difference between that and PCem is that Neko uses smaller dialogs with tabs breaking it up, and less drive image parameter configuration. Neko also doesn't need a launcher.

It's precisely that - smaller dialogs with tabs, and a more orderly design in general. I think PCem would greatly benefit from such a design.
szadycbr
Posts: 181
Joined: Mon 21 Nov, 2016 6:23 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby szadycbr » Mon 08 May, 2017 4:36 pm

"Yes, because Bochs and Qemu are totally known for being user friendly..."

Sarah, you are more than right, on the spot. Some say that PCem is "fairly" difficult to configure, hm? i use to play with Bochs and Qemu and... uff, its easy once you learn, but PCem is by far EASY-est to configure, guys stop complaining, everything is "point and click" no difficulties whatsoever.
The only thing to add is , as someone mention , the power button, so PCem will not start while i try to set it up, after that PCem config is brilliant, or Diamond he he.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Wed 10 May, 2017 8:16 pm

Okay, as of rev 714 the new_config branch now starts the configuration manager first thing, allowing for reconfiguration before starting emulation. Closing the main PCem window will re-open the configuration manager, effectively acting as a power button. And using the --config command line option will bypass the configuration manager entirely and allow you to implement an external configuration manager if that's what you really want.

Everyone happy?
ecksemmess
Posts: 122
Joined: Wed 18 Mar, 2015 5:27 am

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby ecksemmess » Fri 12 May, 2017 6:35 pm

This is great, thanks Sarah! :)
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Battler » Fri 12 May, 2017 11:05 pm

- SarahWalker: I certainly am. :p
User avatar
leilei
Posts: 421
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby leilei » Sat 13 May, 2017 2:33 am

Quickly trying the configurator branch out of curiosity, it doesn't list the cfgs in the same folder as itself, and crashes upon quitting. It CAN make configs though
Katakis
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu 05 Mar, 2015 6:42 am

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Katakis » Tue 16 May, 2017 6:13 am

Battler wrote:It's precisely that - smaller dialogs with tabs, and a more orderly design in general. I think PCem would greatly benefit from such a design.


So, it's similar to what you'll see when you start up WinUAE?

In any case, I am all for it. I get annoyed that I sometimes saved a custom config file without ejecting a disk first, so that would help me a lot. So great work. Sarah.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Tue 16 May, 2017 8:23 pm

On trunk as of rev 724.
User avatar
omarsis81
Posts: 532
Joined: Thu 17 Dec, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby omarsis81 » Wed 17 May, 2017 2:38 pm

I just tested the latest build, it just doesn't work, it crashes when trying to load a config...
Honestly, I don't like the new dialog screen...
Just wondering... why is not like before: you open PCem, configure it the way you like, let's say a SiS 486/66 and save it to a file called "sis486.cfg" and after saving you modify PCem again and to a 430VX, then quit PCem and the last config is automatically saved to default.cfg

If you start PCem right away you'll automatically start the last config which was the 430vx, but let's say you want to run SiS 486... what you can do is: have the .cfg extension (or *.pcm extension if you like) associated to PCem, so you double click the "sis486.cfg" file or any other extension and PCem loads automatically with said configuration.

What do you all think of this?
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Wed 17 May, 2017 5:01 pm

Well clearly people didn't like it, as I got numerous requests to change it!

And couldn't you have said this _before_ I spent time polishing it and getting it to trunk? I did make it available in a branch specifically to get feedback on it...
basic2004
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun 08 Jan, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby basic2004 » Wed 17 May, 2017 5:12 pm

configmanager.png
configmanager.png (2.94 KiB) Viewed 1011 times


Configuration Manager was blank list. what's wrong?
I placed PCem in 'O:\EMUL\Emulator - Computer\IBM-PC\PCem'.
Is this loading cfg files to list automatically?

so I launched with --config arguments, but PCem execute --config pcem.cfg to loads default(8088) settings.
Last edited by basic2004 on Wed 17 May, 2017 5:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Wed 17 May, 2017 5:15 pm

Presumably you don't have any configs in the 'configs' directory. Have you tried to create any?
basic2004
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun 08 Jan, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby basic2004 » Wed 17 May, 2017 5:17 pm

Oh, I moved cfg files to configs folder now, and shows lists now.
This GUI is easy to choose from many machines, so this feature is very nice.
but I want make 'configs' folder if configs folder missing when PCem execute.

and make 'nvr' folder if nvr folder missing too.
PCem needs search and make essential folders.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1310
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby SarahWalker » Wed 17 May, 2017 5:48 pm

The directories exist in the repo. If you use PCem from the directory that it's checked out into then it all works...
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Battler » Wed 17 May, 2017 8:01 pm

The emulator should still automatically create the directories it needs (nvr and config) in case they're not present.
Katakis
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu 05 Mar, 2015 6:42 am

Re: Feature request: revamping config files

Postby Katakis » Thu 18 May, 2017 2:32 am

omarsis81 wrote:If you start PCem right away you'll automatically start the last config which was the 430vx, but let's say you want to run SiS 486... what you can do is: have the .cfg extension (or *.pcm extension if you like) associated to PCem, so you double click the "sis486.cfg" file or any other extension and PCem loads automatically with said configuration.

What do you all think of this?


I think I don't care.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests