This is a heads up for the development guys. Please move this wherever you see fit. Pertains to the development of daocportal and linux support......

This seems to happen when connect.exe tries to auto-patch a client.. unfortunately, I have to allow it to proceed and screw up the client install in order to get ahold of the .dmm files, which I can try to use to mod another fresh client.



Not sure why this happens, but *some* textures are made purple/pink like this, many are not effected but there are some places that are unplayable as a result of everything being pink/purple.

Regards,
Eric

try reapplying the mods again wth game not running or a game.dll in processes that didn't unload.

If only it could be that simple ...

.... just... once...

awwwww.. didn't think so ;(

Luckily I have a 'fresh' copy of daoc to work from that i can keep duplicating. Will share when manage a solution this round.

Yall couldn't leave well enough alone could ya? Had to go making fresh new content and fixing bugs!! JEEZ, the NERVE!


------------

Solution:

Snag that fresh downloaded/updated copy of Daoc. Install a fresh copy of daocportal into the daoc folder. Update portal (sometimes the best way to do this is with both wine and mono giving a go at it), snag the mods folder from the ~/user/.config/daocportal folder (this is where the mods that connect.exe auto-update were dumped by mono). Place that mods folder in the daocportal Application data folder in your wine prefix. Run ModManager.exe (.) with WINE! Apply the mods here manually. Sometimes this hangs, sometimes it doesn't.

Result:


No more disco at the neighbors house! YAY!

Greetings Rajnish,

The issue pertains to the development of daocportal and associated software. Content-side changes "trigger" an update but are not directly responsible for the issue I am sharing. The problem here is that in some cases (could be something to do with a particular version of linux/mono etc), the mods are applied in a manner by the auto-patcher that results in a number of textures being corrupted.

So while I appreciate the *correction* I'm not sure the correction applies to the context here as this is not directed at either the dev or the master that you are defining. I'm fairly confident that I have correctly used the term Developer in this case. However, if there is any question regarding the proper nomenclature we should ask TheKrokoDil.

Regards,
Eric

ya TheKrodil is best person to help out with linux. he is a nut about it!