Romcenter

Wanderer wrote:A few minutes ago, i decided to create a new DB based on recently released MAME 0.142. The first thing that came up was a log with all the issues contained in MAME. Quite a few i might say, much more than what existed in MAME 0.125 (more than twice the issues).

- I was wondering why all the conflicts? I mean, someone in the mamedev team must have noticed them, why do they keep creating/ignoring conflicts? I wonder if they are planning to do anything about it...

Wanderer wrote: - A few "Duplicate CRC (i.e. all ROMs match another game)" and "Missing SHA1", i assume they refer to bad dumps, which is then logical to be removed from the DB.

Wanderer wrote: - Quite a few reports with "merge name removed (ROM name not in parent)". Why is this happening? Is it indeed a MAME error? I mean, from the message i understand that RC assumes a clone rom should exist in the parent. Why?

RomCenter wrote:

Wanderer wrote:- I was wondering why all the conflicts?

I'm asking the same question everytime. I suppose there are so much to do in the core before fixing these problems...

RomCenter wrote:

Wanderer wrote: - Quite a few reports with "merge name removed (ROM name not in parent)". Why is this happening? Is it indeed a MAME error? I mean, from the message i understand that RC assumes a clone rom should exist in the parent. Why?

Because the rom is supposed to be merged. The problem (I think) is that the rom is merged (it is borrowed from the main set), but it is referenced in the clone with a different name. It would not make problems in split mode, but in merge mode ? We will have two identical roms with diferent names ?

RomCenter wrote:So the solution here is to remove the 'merge' link.

RC's log wrote:fb6s1 - Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7R CGA, set 2)
ROM a29040bv.rom2 - merge name removed (ROM name not in parent).

	<game name="fb6v" sourcefile="sfbonus.c" cloneof="fb6" romof="fb6">
		<description>Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7E Dual)</description>
		<year>2006</year>
		<manufacturer>Amcoe</manufacturer>
		<rom name="f06v17e.bin" size="262144" crc="fa42f143" sha1="e410cc7ae1c86b540c5f573974ee68944fc51a3d" region="maincpu" offset="0"/>
		<rom name="fb06rom2.bin" merge="fb06rom2.bin" size="262144" crc="f1adbcd5" sha1="90a8830d000eb634c2db8a09431daba6cdcb2d34" region="oki" offset="0"/>

	<game name="fb6s1" sourcefile="sfbonus.c" cloneof="fb6" romof="fb6">
		<description>Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7R CGA, set 2)</description>
		<year>2006</year>
		<manufacturer>Amcoe</manufacturer>
		<rom name="f06s17r.bin" size="262144" crc="679747d1" sha1="ca702324c436d54f4c23350b1af4f0250915883c" region="maincpu" offset="0"/>
		<rom name="a29040bv.rom2" merge="fb06rom2.bin" size="262144" crc="f1adbcd5" sha1="90a8830d000eb634c2db8a09431daba6cdcb2d34" region="oki" status="baddump" offset="0"/>

Wanderer wrote: Have you tried contacting them about these issues (lately)? Perhaps we could help them on that by pointing the issue.

Wanderer wrote: Yes, seems like the logical thing to do. I was wondering why this is happening though so i took a look at mame's output. Here's an example:

RC's log wrote:fb6s1 - Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7R CGA, set 2)
ROM a29040bv.rom2 - merge name removed (ROM name not in parent).

Code: Select all

	<game name="fb6v" sourcefile="sfbonus.c" cloneof="fb6" romof="fb6">
		<description>Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7E Dual)</description>
		<year>2006</year>
		<manufacturer>Amcoe</manufacturer>
		<rom name="f06v17e.bin" size="262144" crc="fa42f143" sha1="e410cc7ae1c86b540c5f573974ee68944fc51a3d" region="maincpu" offset="0"/>
		<rom name="fb06rom2.bin" merge="fb06rom2.bin" size="262144" crc="f1adbcd5" sha1="90a8830d000eb634c2db8a09431daba6cdcb2d34" region="oki" offset="0"/>

and a little further on...

Code: Select all

	<game name="fb6s1" sourcefile="sfbonus.c" cloneof="fb6" romof="fb6">
		<description>Fruit Bonus '06 - 10th anniversary (Version 1.7R CGA, set 2)</description>
		<year>2006</year>
		<manufacturer>Amcoe</manufacturer>
		<rom name="f06s17r.bin" size="262144" crc="679747d1" sha1="ca702324c436d54f4c23350b1af4f0250915883c" region="maincpu" offset="0"/>
		<rom name="a29040bv.rom2" merge="fb06rom2.bin" size="262144" crc="f1adbcd5" sha1="90a8830d000eb634c2db8a09431daba6cdcb2d34" region="oki" status="baddump" offset="0"/>

The rom "a29040bv.rom2" in game "fb6s1" (discarded by RC as shown in the log) has a "merge" property with the same name as the equivalent rom in its parent game ("fb6v"). If datutil is reporting the rom name as "a29040bv.rom2", it seems logical for RC to "remove the 'merge' link". If the "merge" property though is the name that should be used in case of a merged set, then the clone rom name would be the same as the parent rom name so perhaps datutil should report the rom name as "fb06rom2.bin" and not "a29040bv.rom2". Even better, perhaps it should report that the equivalent rom in the parent set is named "fb06rom2.bin" (so that the name of the rom in the clone set is preserved as "a29040bv.rom2" and not changed to "fb06rom2.bin" which might be different than what the mamedev team intended to have).

Of course all of these will be logical if i'm guessing right and the "merge" property is indeed the name that should be used in case of a merged set and "datutil" currently does not currently report it. Any input on this from logiqx perhaps?