v3.00 Alpha 9 online
Posted by: rob
v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 15:22
My final act from within empeg:
http://www.empeg.com/v3alphaNo release notes yet - Peter will put some online next week. Files for the auto-eq are also "to follow" so don't use that feature yet.
Testing has been minimal - this probably won't work. But maybe it will!
Rob
Posted by: pgrzelak
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 15:26
Testing has been minimal - this probably won't work. But maybe it will!Still a tease, right to the very end!!!
Posted by: Attack
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 15:30
Quote:
My final act from within empeg:
Rob
Do this mean your taking a new job? ^H
edit: Just found your Moving on post 
Posted by: matthew_k
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 15:53
Thanks Rob!
Matthew
Posted by: tonyc
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 15:57
Rob,
You forgot to include source code!
Posted by: tfabris
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 16:18
Quote:
No release notes yet - Peter will put some online next week.
Okay, but do you have any hints as to what's changed since the Amersfoort build?
Thanks for the build, Rob!
Posted by: tfabris
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 16:35
Quote:
Files for the auto-eq are also "to follow" so don't use that feature yet
Will the existing files from the Amersfoort release continue to work, or will new files be required?
Also, the Amersfoort files were reported to have "pop" transients at the beginnings or ends of some of the files because the zero-crossover wasn't selected when the files were created. Were there plans to release a new set of zero-crossed files?
These should be easy to create if that's stilll a problem.
Posted by: mcomb
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 20:26
Quote:
Testing has been minimal - this probably won't work
Anybody had any luck with this version? I seem to be unable to get a working playlist database. I've tried letting the player build its own database (rwm; delete database3; start player), jEmplode with and without "Rebuild from RAM", and emptool.
All methods appear to build a DB succesfully and the player reboots fine (without trying to rebuild on its own), but there is nothing in my playlist menu on the player. It just says "-None-"
jEmplode and emptool both show all my playlists, the player just doesn't seem to see them. I'm beginning to think Rob's last act was to hide all my music from me 
Guess I'll roll back to alpha 8 and see what happens.
-Mike
Posted by: mcomb
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 21:49
Quote:
Guess I'll roll back to alpha 8 and see what happens.
And all my playlists are back. So, beware of alpha 9 I guess.
-Mike
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 22:43
We set up a beowulf cluster of empegs in Cincinnati, but it looks like we should wait for alpha 10 before upgrading them
Posted by: tman
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 22:56
Alpha 9 seems to be working okay for me.
Posted by: image
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 22:57
since alpha9 is out, can alpha8 be released in the wild now?
Posted by: mschrag
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:04
1) Did you use jEmplode w/ a9?
2) Why in the world are you not green -- 2442 posts??
Posted by: tman
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:06
1) Nope. It picked up the database from a7 with no problems. I've not tried emptool, emplode or jemplode with it at all yet.
2) No idea
Posted by: image
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:14
i have the same playlist issue. doesn't seem to be a problem with the databases at all. i cleared out both database3 and playlist, rebuilt, but still no dice. back to a7
Posted by: mcomb
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:23
Quote:
I've not tried emptool, emplode or jemplode with it at all yet.
Yeah, I forgot to mention it, but mine worked fine until the first rebuild as well. After that rebuild nothing I could think of aside from going back to the previous alpha would bring the playlists back.
-Mike
Posted by: tman
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:24
Ahh okay. Makes more sense now
Posted by: image
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:33
now, i'm confused. trevor, are the playlists in alpha9 working for you 100%?
Posted by: tman
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/09/2004 23:40
They work fine for me but I've not tried to rebuild the database with emplode, jemplode or emptool.
Posted by: wfaulk
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 01:54
Quote:
No idea
What ever are you talking about?
Posted by: crazymelki
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 07:18
Same here, playlists work with all alpha's (3,5,7,8) but not with alpha 9. I did also start from scratch (Hard disk builder images) with my backup device, but never got the playlists on my MK2a.
Posted by: image
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 17:22
ok, well, i was determined to get alpha9 working correctly, so i devised this workaround to get playlists. i basically uploaded the player binary as player-a9 on an a7 install. then, with the help of hijack and busybox, i've set up the following in config.ini
Code:
;@MENUEXEC UseV3a9 busybox killall -2 player && /empeg/bin/player-a9
;@MENUEXEC UseV3a7 busybox killall -2 player && /empeg/bin/player
so basically, load up with v3a7 by default, queue up your playlists, and goto v3a9. if you need to change playlists, go back to v3a7 for a bit. There was discussion before of setting up hijack to do this natively or even do some /dev trickery switching hda5 (the player partition) and hdc5 (never used) on boot up like ;@AC and HOME mode.
Posted by: thedon
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 18:10
I am currently running 2.0 Final and would like to upgrade to the Alpha 9 build to get crossfade support. I do realize that there might/will be bugs because this is an Alpha build.
I would like to know, however, if any of you guys *expect* me to have any problems with playlists, etc if I'm comming from 2.0 Final.
I've seen some people say it works (and dosen't work) when comming from differant Alpha builds - But how about right from 2.0 Final?
Thanks guys!
Joey
Posted by: mcomb
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 18:48
Quote:
I've seen some people say it works (and dosen't work) when comming from differant Alpha builds - But how about right from 2.0 Final?
Actually, I think we all agree that playlists will stop working after your first sync (if not before). I think you'd be better off with a7 (or 8 if you can get your hands on it) if your determined to run an alpha version.
-Mike
Anyone have any luck w. these files?
Posted by: mlord
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 25/09/2004 22:46
Is this just the same old "forgot to remount the drives r/w" bug?
Or something new -- Empeg folks -- any guesses? Perhaps Hijack can provide a workaround.
Posted by: mcomb
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 26/09/2004 15:26
Quote:
Is this just the same old "forgot to remount the drives r/w" bug?
I don't remember that bug, but I don't see how it could be. I went through all the steps (including the rwm/launch player/ro) by hand one of the times.
-Mike
Posted by: Shonky
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 27/09/2004 20:59
I have playlists like this in my top level:
Soundtracks
Various
Comedy
singles
A
B
C
..
X
Y
Z
All full albums are then below the single letters sorted by artist first. i.e. like
A
|
+-> Ash
....|
....+-> 1977
When I upgraded to alpha9 all my single letter playlists disappeared. Down, Down, Down only queued songs in the remaining playlists that I could see.
Downgrading to alpha8 and all the single letter playlists magically reappeared without any syncing.
Posted by: peter
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 28/09/2004 08:42
Quote:
No release notes yet - Peter will put some online next week.
Looking at the diff, there aren't in fact any user-visible changes from alpha 8 (just some cleanups, and work on unrelated projects). Except that I broke playlist support. I'll look into how my changes did that, hopefully this week, and try and lash together an alpha 10.
Peter
Posted by: Shonky
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 28/09/2004 08:59
Thanks for the report Peter. If nothing has really changed couldn't you just release v3a8 to the general public?
Is there a reason I'm not aware of for not releasing v3a8?
Posted by: andym
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 28/09/2004 15:13
Quote:
Is there a reason I'm not aware of for not releasing v3a8?
Yeah, just to make people who went to Amersfoort feel more superior 
Posted by: rob
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 06:54
For one thing, Alpha 8 somehow managed to not get tagged (tsk).
Rob
Posted by: Shonky
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 07:04
As in CVS tagged? If so, surely you know the date/time it was built/checked out. I think you can tag things in the past in CVS can't you? Just check out a specific date/time and then tag it? Or can you only put a tag on what's currently HEAD?
I have no problem you releasing an alpha10. I just thought it might be easier to go with alpha8 for now. Saves someone (and that's someone else now right?) having to go through the release process again.
Posted by: Roger
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 07:13
Quote:
As in CVS tagged? If so, surely you know the date/time it was built/checked out. I think you can tag things in the past in CVS can't you? Just check out a specific date/time and then tag it?
1. Yes, as in CVS tagged.
2. Whether Peter and John remember when they built it is another question.
3. Yes, you can tag things in the past.
4. CVS isn't atomic. Just because you know when you built something doesn't necessarily mean that checking out the same date and time will get you exactly the same source. Consider this:
I start a checkout at 09:00:00. At 09:00:05, it's reached files beginning with D. At 09:00:10, someone checks in a file beginning with A. At 09:00:25, my checkout finishes with those files beginning with Z.
Which time do I use to refer to that checked out copy? In this case, it's easy: 09:00:00.
However, what if, at 09:00:15, someone else checks in a file beginning with Y? Now 09:00:00 isn't the correct time for the checkout, because I managed to pick up file Y, but 09:00:25 wouldn't be correct, either, because it would include file A, which I didn't get.
Posted by: Shonky
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 07:20
OK, I'm used to small CVS installations where that sort of situation would be very rare. I doubt there are that many checking things in and out of CVS are there?
Nevermind - just thought it would be easier on the next person who has to release alpha10.
Posted by: peter
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 08:58
Quote:
Whether Peter and John remember when they built it is another question.
We have the datestamps on the upgrade files -- and fortunately they're all about 6.30pm, so it's unlikely any other check-ins were going on. What I'll probably aim to do, under-new-management permitting, is check out the repository at that date, build it, check it's reasonably OK, tag it, and release an alpha 8a. Hopefully I'll get around to that later this week, but Rio Cambridge has a lot on at the moment.
Peter
Posted by: image
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 13:52
can't you just set cvs to verify after checking out?
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 14:04
Hahaha verify what?
CVS has some serious liabilities. You're probing around one of them in this thread now.
Posted by: mschrag
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 14:26
I will say, though, that CVS has never failed or corrupted data on us. And as much as non-atomic commits is lame, I can't say I've ever actually run into a case where it's caused a problem in more than 6 years of using it.
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 15:06
CVS screwed me, never hard enough that I dropped it. When Subversion's fsfs backend works, I will probably switch.
Posted by: schofiel
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 29/09/2004 16:17
Well, if you guys are prepared to do this, it's worth a pint or two from us on the house for your efforts.
What's the local watering hole at the new site?
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 30/09/2004 00:44
Quote:
Well, if you guys are prepared to do this, it's worth a pint or two from us on the house for your efforts.
What's the local watering hole at the new site?
I agree. And if they take PayPal, even better
Posted by: Derek
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 30/09/2004 02:09
wouldn't it be easier for someone who has an Amersfoort CD to just make those files available ... ?
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 30/09/2004 03:57
The people who have it aren't going to do it unless they get the ok from the people they got it from.
Posted by: canuckInOR
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 30/09/2004 04:10
CVS does directory locking, though, so if you're checking out files, no-one else can check files in. I discovered this by leaving a bunch of files partially checked in one day (I left it sitting at the "enter a comment" part), and got back to a bunch of emails wondering why no-one could do anything with CVS. As a result, this may, or may not be a problem, depending on how you have your source code structured.
Posted by: peter
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 30/09/2004 07:28
Quote:
wouldn't it be easier for someone who has an Amersfoort CD to just make those files available ... ?
Not without that tag -- otherwise I'd've released alpha8 by now.
Peter
Posted by: Bagpuss
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 21/10/2004 14:05
Just wondering if there has been any movement on making alpha8 available to the general Empeg community.
I realise the the development guys have probably got loads of better things to do, but it would be really nice for those of us not at Amersfoort to be able to share in the goodness.
Thanks,
Bagpuss.
Posted by: Daria
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 21/10/2004 14:07
Posted by: Glen_L
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 21/10/2004 14:18
...and there was much rejoicing
Posted by: Bagpuss
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 21/10/2004 17:28
That's fantastic news!
Don't know how I managed to miss it, but there you go.......
Thanks again to all the development team who continue to provide their support for what is, after all, a dead product.
Bagpuss.
Posted by: jane
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 22/10/2004 10:11
Cool!
The Alpha8-REceiver version looks interresting...
Could I use an empeg player with an old 3.5" harddisk as a receiver at home... How large would this harddisk have to be?
Marius (Escort Cab / empeg 2 + Sierra Estate / RioCar)
Posted by: peter
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 22/10/2004 11:00
Quote:
Could I use an empeg player with an old 3.5" harddisk as a receiver at home...
You'd need to organise a converter from 44-pin IDE to 40-pin, plus get 5V and 12V supply from somewhere.
Quote:
How large would this harddisk have to be?
About 100Mb should do. Perhaps you could lash something up with a CF card?
Peter
Posted by: jane
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 24/10/2004 19:31
Quote:
You'd need to organise a converter from 44-pin IDE to 40-pin, plus get 5V and 12V supply from somewhere.
That should be doable... the player will probably be powered from regulated 12V anyway... converter "the other way" is easy to get hold of... May be possible to use... (To late in the evening for me to determine how difficlt it would be.)
Marius (Escort Cab / MkII Sierra Estate /MkIIa)
Posted by: Taym
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 17/11/2004 21:41
I'm using Alpha7, since I don't like the way Alpha 8 sounds when I adjust the EQ.
I started to have some problems with playlists. When loading Emplode or Jemplode, sometimes I get errors saying some fids have 0 refs, and will be put in the root dir. Surprisingly, at that precise time they actually don't appear any more in their original playlists, so emplode and jemplode seem to be right. I am not 100% sure, but - and here's my question n. 1
- would it be possible that the problem occurs exactly when emplode or jemplode connect to the player? I am saying this because I don't notice any song missing during normal usage, but I may very well have not happened to enter a playlist and find it empty during normal usage.
After the prolem occurs, I have to move the fids back to their place and resync. Now, after few times this has happened (rarely, I have to say), I realized that, even after the sync, some playlist or song is still "missing". The tune is there, since I can find it with a search, but it does not appear in any playlist. Strange thing is, it does not even appear among the 0 refs tunes in the "all tracks" view. So, here's my second question:
Is it possible that the ref count is corrupted? If so, how can I fix it?
Thank you in advance!
Posted by: Taym
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 17/11/2004 21:54
Question N. 3. I remember seeing it asked, but could not find in which post.
Once I know a track has ref=1, is there a way to know in which playlist it is located?
Posted by: tfabris
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 17/11/2004 21:56
There's a way to change the color in Jemplode, I think it's on the rightclick menu, it colors all trees that contain that track.
Posted by: Mataglap
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 17/11/2004 23:29
Hey! That's the same problem I've been having. There's a few posts scattered arount from me about that. I really havent't gotten anywhere with it, and am thinking that maybe what I need to do is reload everything just using jemplode.
One thing I've noticed is that some fids have a much higer refcount than they should. On my system it's just artist/album/song, so everything should only have one reference, but there are songs that have refcount=4, and they're ones that have disappeared after connecting.
--Nathan
Posted by: Taym
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 20/11/2004 07:47
Tony, thanks, that's a great idea.
I haven't had a chance to test it, yet, but that would tell us at least it there's actually a mistake in the ref count.
Metaglap, if there's such mistake, I wonder if there's a way to find out which songs have a refcount 1 and are not in any playlist, at east. Besides changing color to all of them, one by one...
Posted by: Taym
Re: v3.00 Alpha 9 online - 21/11/2004 11:43
Ok, playing around with colors, it seems to me that the refcount is not wrong. However, playlists tend to "lose" their sub-playlists.
For example, my "L" playlist lost all its content. So all the playlists underneath it decreased their ref count by one, and those which went down to refcount=0 generated the error I mentioned previously.
So the problem does not seem to be in the ref count, but in the fact that sometimes sub-playlists are "lost" and need to be relocated where they originally were.
I only found 2 of the Alpha8 originals that had issues that looked bad enough...