[Partially-Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Support and general discussion.
User avatar
James-F
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue 30 May, 2017 10:26 am

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby James-F » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 6:42 pm

STOP it, both of you.
This emulator is going nowhere if you don't cooperate.

Kiss and make up... in a friendly way.
And proceed to make the best PC emulator with joint forces.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 7:33 pm

Battler wrote:
SarahWalker wrote:Want to see Battler's changes in mainline? Convince him to start working with me again, instead of being an utter tit.

I thought I said just today in another thread that I was going to make a NukedOPL diff later today in another thread, so how am I refusing to contribute?

Your last attempt to contribute was 8 months ago. Are you seriously telling me the only thing you've done since then is port someone else's OPL emulator?

In any case, I'm sick of hearing about you and fucking 86Box. Can't you go and inflict yourself on some other emulator developer?
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 7:45 pm

SarahWalker wrote:Your last attempt to contribute was 8 months ago. Are you seriously telling me the only thing you've done since then is port someone else's OPL emulator?

I did more things than that but I started with NukedOPL because it's the simplest thing for me to make a patch of. The rest would require considerable amounts of work, especially consideing I would have to split it all into smaller patches first and I have no idea how to do that in a logical way.

Also, another user of this forum told me that you apparently told him you do not want my changes anyway due to your personal dislike of me. I'd like to know what the truth is.
SA1988
Posts: 206
Joined: Wed 30 Apr, 2014 9:38 am

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SA1988 » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 7:48 pm

Side note: I'd like to know about why most of my bug reports/general reports get ignored. Just to say it in the kindest way. (like the recent the trio64 bug on OS/2, though one driver set doesn't have that issue in 1024x768 in 8bpp/16bpp). Aside from this, I have a patch to solve the GUI freeze in OS/2 using those drivers and others, in port 0x9ae9 and I'll commit soon on this forum.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 7:59 pm

Battler wrote:Also, another user of this forum told me that you apparently told him you do not want my changes anyway due to your personal dislike of me. I'd like to know what the truth is.

Will people stop passing around hearsay and speculation like this? This has been the case ever since SA1988 was slagging me off to you before you ever tried to talk to me, and frankly it's just childish.

I have never said anything about whether or not I would want your changes or not. If you provide patches then I will consider them like every other change I'm given. If you worked in a more logical way then this would not be so difficult.

Whether I like you or not has no bearing on whether I will consider any contributions, it merely determines how much time I wish to spend around you.

As 'another user' has said that you still want direct access to the repo, I can tell you now that I will never give you this. Pretty sure I've already told you this, though.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 8:01 pm

SA1988 wrote:Side note: I'd like to know about why most of my bug reports/general reports get ignored.

They have not been ignored, I am merely prioritising them. As I would not consider most of them urgent they get pushed back to the end of the development cycle.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 8:22 pm

As 'another user' has said that you still want direct access to the repo, I can tell you now that I will never give you this. Pretty sure I've already told you this, though.

I know this user is James-F (he told me it was him), and I never told him I want direct access, I simply told him that you told me that I will never have such access because you don't like my lax policies when it comes to accepting pull requests. And I do admit this kind of puts me off from contributing, since I don't like the idea of working hard while knowing I will never benefit from that work. And that's not your fault, but it's due to some bad real-life work experiences I've had.
Also, I would love to contribute back, I just have no idea how to split the enormous amount of my changes into small patches, especially since most of the changes are heavily intertwined. Some of them would potentially conflict with your own similar changes, eg. my SCSI emulation would potentially conflict with the one you're trying to add so I'm first waiting for you to commit yours so I can see how to bring the two together without breaking everything. And some of them would severely break compiling for Linux, eg. my changes to the Windows CD-ROM IOCTL code for example, as I changed most commands to just directly pass through to the host drive as that way things like copy-protected CD's are more likely to work, and I need to find someone knowledgeable in Linux first so he can port the direct pass through code to Linux. Other changes are still flat out buggy (the new UI code still causes some crashes for example).
So the second big reason why I haven't contributed anything is that most changes I feel are not yet ready to be contributed, and those that are, tend to rely on the changes that are not.
Also, some changes are actually very old (they have been there from the PCem-X days) and I have actually contributed them here and am still waiting for you to look at them, like my AT keyboard changes for example which I submitted as a patch in late 2015 for example.

And the main reason why I decided to go create a fork anyway was because, and I told you that on IRC the last few times you were there, I eventually want to venture into non-PC-compatible x86 machines such as the PC-98, FM-Towns, PC-186, etc., and I know that that stuff is something you don't want in PCem and I have no intention to force it on you.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 8:42 pm

Battler wrote:
As 'another user' has said that you still want direct access to the repo, I can tell you now that I will never give you this. Pretty sure I've already told you this, though.

I know this user is James-F (he told me it was him), and I never told him I want direct access, I simply told him that you told me that I will never have such access because you don't like my lax policies when it comes to accepting pull requests. And I do admit this kind of puts me off from contributing, since I don't like the idea of working hard while knowing I will never benefit from that work.

It's a free emulator, you don't benefit from it any way. I don't benefit from anything I do on PCem.

Also, I would love to contribute back, I just have no idea how to split the enormous amount of my changes into small patches, especially since most of the changes are heavily intertwined. Some of them would potentially conflict with your own similar changes, eg. my SCSI emulation would potentially conflict with the one you're trying to add

My what now?

I was thinking about writing some SCSI emulation, since there was zero sign that anything would ever be contributed back. But I haven't actually done it yet.

So the second big reason why I haven't contributed anything is that most changes I feel are not yet ready to be contributed, and those that are, tend to rely on the changes that are not.

So why not spend some time actually sorting this out? This has been going on for a very VERY long time, which is why I tend to be hugely skeptical whenever you say anything like this.

Also, some changes are actually very old (they have been there from the PCem-X days) and I have actually contributed them here and am still waiting for you to look at them, like my AT keyboard changes for example which I submitted as a patch in late 2015 for example.

If I've not responded to any patches in 18 months then I've completely forgotten about them. Don't just sit around waiting for something to happen, because that's a guarantee that nothing ever will.

And the main reason why I decided to go create a fork anyway was because, and I told you that on IRC the last few times you were there, I eventually want to venture into non-PC-compatible x86 machines such as the PC-98, FM-Towns, PC-186, etc., and I know that that stuff is something you don't want in PCem and I have no intention to force it on you.

That's fine, it's just that you've had a fork for several years now, and as of the last time I checked, have committed absolutely nothing of the sort. Hence why I don't believe you when you say things like this.

And that's really the problem. You say that you want to contribute back. But you don't! You keep coming up with excuses, while seemingly not doing anything to actually resolve the problems you say you have. How long am I supposed to wait? In the mean time, all that happens is that you take my code and give nothing back. And that is what really pisses me off.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:12 pm

SarahWalker wrote:My what now?

I was thinking about writing some SCSI emulation, since there was zero sign that anything would ever be contributed back. But I haven't actually done it yet.

Well then I was given more false information, since the source (which is the same as for the other piece of hearsay, which I PM'd you the name of) told me you had done your own SCSI code already.

So why not spend some time actually sorting this out? This has been going on for a very VERY long time, which is why I tend to be hugely skeptical whenever you say anything like this.

That's what I'm doing, and that's what I have other people test the things too to find any bugs. I still get a lot of complaints about how mainline PCem is more stable, and until that's the case, do you really want me to contribute back code that will make mainline PCem less stable?
Remember though, that I also do other things outside the emulator, I am moderator of BetaArchive, I run my own IRC network, and I spend time looking for a job as well. But yeah, I do spend my time fixing bugs. Once enough bugs are squished that people stop saying it's less stable than mainline PCem, then I can start thinking of how to make patches.

If I've not responded to any patches in 18 months then I've completely forgotten about them. Don't just sit around waiting for something to happen, because that's a guarantee that nothing ever will.

Well, the patch I mentioned is this: viewtopic.php?f=3&t=377 . Though I do admit I was essentially told to make another patch without the XT "fix", but I forgot. I apologize for that.

That's fine, it's just that you've had a fork for several years now, and as of the last time I checked, have committed absolutely nothing of the sort. Hence why I don't believe you when you say things like this.

No, the intention to eventually venture into non-PC-compatible machines arose when I gave it the name 86Box. PCem-X was... well, I won't say it here, too strong language would be needed to describe it. :p And everything between the two (PCem-Experimental/PCem-Unofficial) was not a fork at all but just my personal working tree so to say. So I've had this intention for like 8 months or so now. And that time is not enough for that to happen because I want to start with the PC-98 and its documentation is in Japanese, and that' s not a language you acquire full proficiency in in just 8 months, especially when you have to memorize over 2000 (literally!) characters to be able to read enough.

while seemingly not doing anything to actually resolve the problems you say you have.

As I said, bugs are being fixed, and the splitting into patches will come after they are fixed. And I am going to need a lot of discussion with you on how to split all the big changes into patches.
User avatar
leilei
Posts: 436
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby leilei » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:17 pm

There's also the issue of contributor poaching. Even I were told to contribute my Voodoo changes to 86box instead of PCem on discord at one point

Sabotage and discrediting PCem for an arrogant quest? Possibly.... Reddit sure shows enough evidence of this.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:19 pm

- leilei: Such contributor poaching is in no way endorsed by me. I have repeatedly told people that this is not some sort of competition and everyone should be let to decide on their own where they should submit their changes. However, people don't listen.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:21 pm

Battler wrote:
SarahWalker wrote:My what now?

I was thinking about writing some SCSI emulation, since there was zero sign that anything would ever be contributed back. But I haven't actually done it yet.

Well then I was given more false information, since the source (which is the same as for the other piece of hearsay, which I PM'd you the name of) told me you had done your own SCSI code already.

I've written SCSI code for another emulator in the past. Nothing exists for PCem yet.

while seemingly not doing anything to actually resolve the problems you say you have.

As I said, bugs are being fixed, and the splitting into patches will come after they are fixed. And I am going to need a lot of discussion with you on how to split all the big changes into patches.

I seem to recall we've been here before...
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:21 pm

Battler wrote:- leilei: Such contributor poaching is in no way endorsed by me. I have repeatedly told people that this is not some sort of competition and everyone should be let to decide on their own where they should submit their changes. However, people don't listen.

You've repeatedly said that you consider PCem and 86Box to be a competition, and that 'the market' would decide the 'winner'.
User avatar
omarsis81
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu 17 Dec, 2015 6:20 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby omarsis81 » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:32 pm

SarahWalker wrote:How long am I supposed to wait? In the mean time, all that happens is that you take my code and give nothing back. And that is what really pisses me off.

86Box is open source too. If Battler takes code from you, why don't you take a peek over Battler's code and take what you consider useful? And don't think he'll get angry by that.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:44 pm

SarahWalker wrote:You've repeatedly said that you consider PCem and 86Box to be a competition, and that 'the market' would decide the 'winner'.

And why is it that you seem to remember to the last detail everything bad I ever said while you don't remember even the patches I submitted 2 years ago? :p

Yes, I did say that, but my point was that it's actually the opposite of a competition - since I pass the ball to everyone else and am not going to advertise my work or otherwise care what people think. And I said that to clearly show that the era of PCem-X-style contributor poaching and "we are better than PCem" e-peen showing off was over. :p
User avatar
leilei
Posts: 436
Joined: Fri 25 Apr, 2014 4:47 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby leilei » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:48 pm

your second-in-command != "everyone else"
Attachments
al45.png
al45.png (12.49 KiB) Viewed 1078 times
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 9:50 pm

Mooch is *NOT* my second in command. She does not have write access to my repository, and she has been banned from my IRC channel more times than I can count for exactly this kind of attitude. And I also repeatedly told her to stop her anti-PCem bull____, but she doesn't listen.

Edit: OK, I just yelled at her again, because I've seriously had enough... I do understand that she has her mental conditions but that's no excuse...
Malik
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat 20 May, 2017 2:43 am

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Malik » Sat 03 Jun, 2017 11:55 pm

Battler wrote:While you get the selection in 86Box for any card, the MPU-401 is still only active if you use the SB16 or AWE32. Now maybe I should add a checkbox for MPU-401 so that you can use it as an add-on device with other cards as well, but of course that would be ignored when the SB16 or AWE32 is selected.


I see. Yes, a MPU-401 independent of sound cards will be immensely useful.
Katakis
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu 05 Mar, 2015 6:42 am

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Katakis » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 1:48 am

James-F wrote:Indeed, I don't want to see two forks go different ways, this is indeed bad for the future of this great PC emulator.
Please make up, and know that fights also happen in the best of families. :)


Indeed.
basic2004
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun 08 Jan, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby basic2004 » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 3:45 am

Katakis wrote:
James-F wrote:Indeed, I don't want to see two forks go different ways, this is indeed bad for the future of this great PC emulator.
Please make up, and know that fights also happen in the best of families. :)


Indeed.

Me, too.
I used PCem and 86Box half year, (I didn't know 86Box half year ago, when I knew discontinued PCem-X.)
and I thank these two emulators, and authors and contributers.

I thought,
86Box oriented for ability, this going to experimental now.
PCem oriented for actually, this going to conservative now.

but I think these will go better ways, someday.
Katakis
Posts: 68
Joined: Thu 05 Mar, 2015 6:42 am

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Katakis » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 6:13 am

James-F wrote:Indeed, I don't want to see two forks go different ways, this is indeed bad for the future of this great PC emulator.


I don't think that will happen. There are still other contributors besides Battler that are focusing on PCem, submititng patches to Sarah so she can implement them.

In any case, If Sarah decides to kill PCem just because of one rogue contributor, then I wish her the best of luck.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 7:20 am

Battler wrote:Mooch is *NOT* my second in command. She does not have write access to my repository, and she has been banned from my IRC channel more times than I can count for exactly this kind of attitude. And I also repeatedly told her to stop her anti-PCem bull____, but she doesn't listen.

Edit: OK, I just yelled at her again, because I've seriously had enough... I do understand that she has her mental conditions but that's no excuse...

Why do you keep tolerating her?
altheos
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed 24 Feb, 2016 7:27 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby altheos » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 11:52 am

basic2004 wrote:
Katakis wrote:
James-F wrote:Indeed, I don't want to see two forks go different ways, this is indeed bad for the future of this great PC emulator.
Please make up, and know that fights also happen in the best of families. :)


Indeed.

Me, too.
I used PCem and 86Box half year, (I didn't know 86Box half year ago, when I knew discontinued PCem-X.)
and I thank these two emulators, and authors and contributers.

I thought,
86Box oriented for ability, this going to experimental now.
PCem oriented for actually, this going to conservative now.

but I think these will go better ways, someday.

I'm agree with basic2004 : don't blame but i use both software and tend to use pcem for stability and 86box for bleeding edge. (by the way Battler where to report bugs ?). It's like installing a debian and an arch distro.
On a side note, i wish to thank all the contributors of these software gems.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 11:59 am

So the work I do isn't 'bleeding edge' then?
basic2004
Posts: 118
Joined: Sun 08 Jan, 2017 5:59 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby basic2004 » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 12:40 pm

altheos wrote:I'm agree with basic2004 : don't blame but i use both software and tend to use pcem for stability and 86box for bleeding edge. (by the way Battler where to report bugs ?). It's like installing a debian and an arch distro.
On a side note, i wish to thank all the contributors of these software gems.

You can report issues about 86Box's bug to 86Box's github.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 12:47 pm

- SarahWalker: No, I think he just meant that PCem is more stable than 86Box, something that I told you last night already that people do say. :p

Why do you keep tolerating her?

Because I feel like some day she might improve, that and I do recognize the positive she does do (code contribution) despite all the negative.

I seem to recall we've been here before...

Back when you were on my IRC channel in December, I told you we need to have more discussions and find a way that would make it easier for me to contribute (the sheer amount of changes means if I were to go and start splitting them all into small patches, that would essentially became my full-time job :p), while at the same time it would benefit you as well. And said discussions never took place.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 1:43 pm

Yes, because we had these discussions before, worked on getting the PCem-X changes merged, worked together on the FDC changes, then you decided it wasn't working and stopped cooperating. And didn't tell me for several weeks until I pushed the issue on IRC. Why should I try to meet you halfway if you won't put the effort in?

If Mooch was going to change she would have done so by now. By continuing to indulge her you're merely giving her reasons not to change. You're wasting your time.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 1:53 pm

SarahWalker wrote:Yes, because we had these discussions before, worked on getting the PCem-X changes merged, worked together on the FDC changes, then you decided it wasn't working and stopped cooperating. And didn't tell me for several weeks until I pushed the issue on IRC. Why should I try to meet you halfway if you won't put the effort in?

I'm not sure if I remember right but I recall deciding it was too difficult shortly before you pushed the issue on IRC. Until then I tried to get myself to work on making patches but I broke down and became unable to do anything because of anxiety, as there were things I wanted to do but I kept worrying on how to do it in a way that would be easy to split it into smaller patches. So basically from my last contribution to your pushing me on IRC, I actually did absolutely nothing at all. And I think when you pushed the issue on IRC, I actually told you about my anxiety and how it was making it more difficult for me to do anything, and you dismissed it.

If Mooch was going to change she would have done so by now. By continuing to indulge her you're merely giving her reasons not to change. You're wasting your time.

Mooch is only 18, when I was her age, I was just as insufferable as she is now, probably even more. I believe that as time goes on, she will mellow down and stop doing this. Yes, it's going to be a hard, bumpy road ahead with her, but I'm prepared to take it. Also, I am not continuing to indulge here, since I yell at her whenever I catch her being an idiot, as does the rest of my staff.
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 1333
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby SarahWalker » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 2:40 pm

Battler wrote:
SarahWalker wrote:Yes, because we had these discussions before, worked on getting the PCem-X changes merged, worked together on the FDC changes, then you decided it wasn't working and stopped cooperating. And didn't tell me for several weeks until I pushed the issue on IRC. Why should I try to meet you halfway if you won't put the effort in?

I'm not sure if I remember right but I recall deciding it was too difficult shortly before you pushed the issue on IRC. Until then I tried to get myself to work on making patches but I broke down and became unable to do anything because of anxiety, as there were things I wanted to do but I kept worrying on how to do it in a way that would be easy to split it into smaller patches. So basically from my last contribution to your pushing me on IRC, I actually did absolutely nothing at all. And I think when you pushed the issue on IRC, I actually told you about my anxiety and how it was making it more difficult for me to do anything, and you dismissed it.

Oh great, back to anxiety again. Maybe you should get a less stressful hobby?

Also, I am not continuing to indulge here, since I yell at her whenever I catch her being an idiot, as does the rest of my staff.

Evidence would suggest that you 'yelling' has zero impact.
Battler
Posts: 793
Joined: Sun 06 Jul, 2014 7:05 pm

Re: [Solved] PCem v12 and Sound Lag

Postby Battler » Sun 04 Jun, 2017 2:55 pm

Evidence would suggest that you 'yelling' has zero impact.

It takes a lot of time to change someone.
Last edited by Battler on Sun 04 Jun, 2017 3:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest