Question about internal gui, missing option?

Door DrWh0

Paladin (834)

afbeelding van DrWh0

03-02-2014, 22:22

Hi guys,

I have a question about the internal gui of openmsx.

Anyone knows where is "firmware key switch" option? the function you activate when in console you type "set firmwareswitch on" or the button labeled "firmware" in catapult

I hope this question it haven´t been answered in the past, if so, sorry about that, but i have been searching in the manual without luck.

Thanks in advance Smile

Aangemeld of registreer om reacties te plaatsen

Van Manuel

Ascended (18233)

afbeelding van Manuel

04-02-2014, 21:15

With the "internal gui" you probably mean the OSD menu, right?

That menu does not have the firmware key switch implemented at the moment. It has only the most common functionality implemented and we did not think that the firmware switch was part of that. Do you disagree with that assessment? If so, I'm interested to hear why Smile

Van DrWh0

Paladin (834)

afbeelding van DrWh0

04-02-2014, 23:11

Thanks for your response Manuel Smile

In first place I would like to thank you again to every member of openmsx team for your great work, believe me, I like openmsx a lot, is a great emulator but it always has the very same problem, version after version and it is the lack of usability (I feel frequently like I was in the 90s, using the console of fmsx typing commands using CTRL+F9)

My opinion as user is that the internal osd should have all the options, and I humbly disagree about having a "cutted" osd, one of the reasons that bluemsx is preferred by windows users are the lack of internal GUI.

But for me as a linux user , this lack of funcionality is even worse, a total pain mainly to its horrible dependencies policy, compiling openmsx-catapult package is very problematic due to its versioning, openmsx binary does not use the same libraries as catapult (of course, is a separate program) and I frequently have problems each time I upgrade, and guess, do you know when I have problems? always while compiling catapult, each version changes the versions of libraries (always putting the most advanced even more advanced than included in last versions of unstable newer distros), and libwx affects a wide range of applications and forces me to download and patch my linux with new versions of libraries and that sometimes breaks things.

As programmer I can understand you use last versions because it increases easiness of programming, cleaness of code and solves a lot of bugs, but for example, see the differences between the most part of libraries used in catapult 0.9.1->0.10.0 and not in openmsx binary (really do you need changing the minors versions? for example changing from 1.8->1.8.1, really?)

And worse, for example, look at launchpad in ubuntu (I use debian & ubuntu in different boxes, but I mention ubuntu because is the most "modern" distro, using experimental or not very well tested packages), each new version, compiling issues, 95% due to catapult inconsistencies.

So I decided to drop catapult and use internal osd, so, I can upgrade versions without problems, the OSD obviously needs work, and it´s not very clear to use for a novice, but, hey, it works without too much problem and it is useful (it lacks a few features that catapult have, like the firmware button, checking machines, etc..).

I think that is a wrong approach not improving internal OSD (not listening to users), you absolutely should improve the osd and drop catapult once for all (catapult is nice under a linux box, but in windows its face is horrible)

I am not asking for a beatiful OSD with water/3d/opengl/fire/"put-your-effect-here" effects, tooltips or an animated penguin pointing the options, only an internal gui that works.

In linux I use terminal because is faster and easier in a lot of circunstancies than using guis, I am a linux user but I am not masochist, in openmsx using commands are simply not practical for normal use and spoils the fun.

I do this suggestion and the reasons why I do it, I don´t pretend to offend anybody, and ask for pardon if I do unconsciously.

Thanks for listening, and once more, thanks for openmsx Smile

Van Manuel

Ascended (18233)

afbeelding van Manuel

05-02-2014, 10:47

OK, let me write some reactions here.

DrWh0 wrote:

In first place I would like to thank you again to every member of openmsx team for your great work, believe me, I like openmsx a lot, is a great emulator but it always has the very same problem, version after version and it is the lack of usability (I feel frequently like I was in the 90s, using the console of fmsx typing commands using CTRL+F9)

Yes, we know. We have a normal GUI planned for the long run. But it can take a long time (perhaps a few years).
Of course, people are invited to help us with this.

Quote:

My opinion as user is that the internal osd should have all the options, and I humbly disagree about having a "cutted" osd, one of the reasons that bluemsx is preferred by windows users are the lack of internal GUI.

The OSD menu will never have all the options. It's simply becoming way too cluttered then, and the OSD menu isn't suitable for all options. So, we'd rather focus on making the above mentioned planned GUI. The OSD menu was mostly targeted for handheld usage (think about Android devices (like phones) and Dingoo).

Quote:

But for me as a linux user , this lack of funcionality is even worse, a total pain mainly to its horrible dependencies policy, compiling openmsx-catapult package is very problematic due to its versioning, openmsx binary does not use the

I don't understand the issue here. What is the problem about compiling Catapult? It has had the same dependencies for years and years. (Because its development is mostly stopped.) Especially in Debian and Ubuntu it is very easy to install the build dependencies. It is explained in the manual (short cut: apt-get build-dep openmsx-catapult).

Quote:

same libraries as catapult (of course, is a separate program) and I frequently have problems each time I upgrade, and guess, do you know when I have problems? always while compiling catapult, each version changes the versions of libraries (always putting the most advanced even more advanced than included in last versions of unstable newer distros), and libwx affects a wide range of applications and forces me to download and patch my linux with new versions of libraries and that sometimes breaks things.

Why are you compiling openMSX and Catapult yourself if you can also use the ones provided in the distro?
If the reason is: they are too old, then see above for the dependency management: apt-get build-dep openmsx openmsx-catapult

It sounds like you are using the staticbindist build menthod. That method downloads, configures and compiles all dependencies automatically. And with that method, the exact version numbers of packages are specified. But that should all just work out of the box. What is the problem here? (Anyway, this method is not very useful on a normal Linux installation.)

Quote:

And worse, for example, look at launchpad in ubuntu (I use debian & ubuntu in different boxes, but I mention ubuntu because is the most "modern" distro, using experimental or not very well tested packages), each new version, compiling issues, 95% due to catapult inconsistencies.

I have no idea what you are talking about. What inconsistencies?

Quote:

So I decided to drop catapult and use internal osd, so, I can upgrade versions without problems, the OSD obviously needs work, and it´s not very clear to use for a novice, but, hey, it works without too much problem and it is useful (it lacks a few features that catapult have, like the firmware button, checking machines, etc..).

What do you think are the most important missing features and usability issues in the OSD menu?

Quote:

I think that is a wrong approach not improving internal OSD (not listening to users), you absolutely should improve the osd and drop catapult once for all (catapult is nice under a linux box, but in windows its face is horrible)

We can't drop Catapult until the new GUI is ready. What do you mean with 'its face is horrible'? What's wrong with it?

Anyway, see above about improving the OSD menu. Small things OK, but large stuff (like all features must be in), just won't happen.

Also notice: you are asking a lot. You can help out if you really want to get things done, of course!

Quote:

In linux I use terminal because is faster and easier in a lot of circunstancies than using guis, I am a linux user but I am not masochist, in openmsx using commands are simply not practical for normal use and spoils the fun.

Well, it depends. I am so used to it, that I never use Catapult or the OSD menu in Linux... But I can imagine that most people won't have that Tongue

Van DrWh0

Paladin (834)

afbeelding van DrWh0

05-02-2014, 12:35

Thanks for responding me so fast Manuel and for giving me some of your time Smile

Please, allow me to resume the post in order to be short as possible in the following points, and keep in mind that I am not criticizing only giving you "user feedback" with my limited free time, of course an advanced user can solve any inconsistency/problem that appears (at least I have been able to), only I am adding a few suggestions for improving the project:

1.- I am not asking throwing away catapult now, I was suggesting to focus in the internal osd instead of duplicating efforts maintaining two separate packages when you actually need to maintain only one, if there is no alternative or a full internal gui better using catapult than nothing, of course. Sorry about the misunderstanding here

2.- You have left clear as crystal that osd/gui is not a priority, and never will, so is pointless to make suggestions about that but I would like if possible two little things to the OSD, firmware button and test configuration machines (I understand that "type/paste" windows would be too big to implement currently). Thanks anyhow for your interest

3.- I followed the official compilation guide at paragraph 4.1 "Compilation" under chapter 4 "Binary for local system":

http://openmsx.sourceforge.net/manual/compile.html

The method you mention is in 2.2 paragraph and only works for openmsx versions available in the installed distro repositories (for example if you use stable repositories of ubuntu 12.04 LTS you will have only openmsx 0.8.1), if openmsx had its own repositories this would be great and the simple method would be the standard, and all issues with versions would dissapear (like paragraph 3) :)

3.- Version issues as I said before occurs most of time due to catapult, that not means that each minor version of catapult changes all, for example, 0.7.0->0.8.1 didn´t break nothing, but I had that kind issues scalating from 0.8.1->0.9.1-> 0.1.0 under ubuntu due to wxwidgets/libwx/graphical environment changes. The "incosistencies" I mentioned at launchpad are that openmsx-catapult usually are the package that slows down implementation of new versions in new versions of the distro, and you can see for example each time that ubuntu upgrades, even the bug of lacking the ".desktop" file has been there during 3 versions (fortunately at least is present in 0.1.0 source code of catapult), of course we can solve all of these problems, but normal/novice users sticks at older versions due to it.

After this post, I hope you have a better idea about what I am suggesting, at least keep in mind in future releases. I am only trying to help and giving you the "user feedback" you asked for.

Thanks again Manuel for listening me :)

Van Manuel

Ascended (18233)

afbeelding van Manuel

06-02-2014, 14:46

Hi,

I am always interested to discuss about openMSX, so I'm happy to have this discussion too.

DrWh0 wrote:

1.- I am not asking throwing away catapult now, I was suggesting to focus in the internal osd instead of duplicating efforts maintaining two separate packages when you actually need to maintain only one, if there is no alternative or a full internal gui better using catapult than nothing, of course. Sorry about the misunderstanding here

Well, as I said, activity on Catapult has been standing still since about 2007, only recently some small things were fixed and added. But that's more of a coincidence (direct reason: someone was interested to work on it).

We don't like to work either on 3 different user interfaces. Hence my message that we'd rather focus on working towards the final GUI, than making a perfect OSD menu.

Quote:

2.- You have left clear as crystal that osd/gui is not a priority, and never will, so is pointless to make suggestions about that but I would like if possible two little things to the OSD, firmware button and test configuration machines (I understand that "type/paste" windows would be too big to implement currently). Thanks anyhow for your interest

That's not true: OSD menu does have quite a high priority, but not for all use cases. As I said before, it is the only UI for handheld/phone users, so everything a typical user on these platform wants to do, should be supported in the OSD menu.

And if it's not taking LOADS of work, any other request can always be implemented. Just don't expect it to support ALL openMSX features.

Do you think the firmware button is so important that it MUST be in the OSD menu?
Testing configurations might be interesting, I'll think about it.

Quote:

3.- I followed the official compilation guide at paragraph 4.1 "Compilation" under chapter 4 "Binary for local system":

http://openmsx.sourceforge.net/manual/compile.html

That's good! :)

Quote:

The method you mention is in 2.2 paragraph and only works for openmsx versions available in the installed distro repositories (for example if you use stable repositories of ubuntu 12.04 LTS you will have only openmsx 0.8.1), if openmsx had its own repositories this would be great and the simple method would be the standard, and all issues with versions would dissapear (like paragraph 3) :)

It works if you have an openMSX in the distro which is not too old. The last change in dependencies was for laserdisc support, which was implemented in openMSX 0.8.0. So even with Ubuntu 12.04 LTS, this should work.
I can easily compile openMSX every day on my Debian testing distro, I never had to install a specific extra library.

We can't make our own repositories for all distros out there... this would be quite some overkill. Most users won't compile themselves anyway, they just use what's in the distro.

Quote:

3.- Version issues as I said before occurs most of time due to catapult, that not means that each minor version of catapult changes all, for example, 0.7.0->0.8.1 didn´t break nothing, but I had that kind issues scalating from 0.8.1->0.9.1-> 0.1.0 under ubuntu due to wxwidgets/libwx/graphical environment changes. The "incosistencies" I mentioned at launchpad are

That's strange, because nothing was changed to Catapult's dependencies at all. So, this is definitely not something we can fix.
One exception perhaps: some distros use already wxWidgets 3.0. We noticed that Catapult 0.10.0 doesn't compile on that platform (they made some incompatible changes). Next release, this will be fixed.

Quote:

that openmsx-catapult usually are the package that slows down implementation of new versions in new versions of the distro, and you can see for example each time that ubuntu upgrades, even the bug of lacking the ".desktop" file has been there during 3 versions (fortunately at least is present in 0.1.0 source code of catapult), of course we can solve all of these problems, but normal/novice users sticks at older versions due to it.

The .desktop issue is not an issue that can be solved by the developers of the program. It was also never reported back 'upstream' (that is: to us). So it's nothing we can do about, it's very distro specific. As far as I know, this is not new (older versions didn't have it either, or it's something the packagers added). All packager's things, not our things, unfortunately.

Quote:

After this post, I hope you have a better idea about what I am suggesting, at least keep in mind in future releases. I am only trying to help and giving you the "user feedback" you asked for.

Yes, thanks a lot for the feedback. Keep it coming! I hope I have clarified a bit how things are from our perspective and why things are as they are.