Hi all,

i prepare a new pack for MorphOS 3.14

This is the changes list in real time of modifications:

- add Wayfarer 1.1 (jacaDcaps)
- update Iris 0.93 (jacaDcaps)
- update Grunch databases (jPV and Thomas Igracki)
- add AtomicBomberMan 2.11 (need data files) (Daytona675x)
- update ScummVM 2.2.0 (BeWorld)
- update EasyRPG Player 0.6.2.3 (BSzili)
- update last version of SDL2 Libraries (BeWorld and BSzili)
- update WebRadio.sbar 2.2 (Thomas Igracki)
- OpenURL configured for Wayfarer and Iris
- update MPlayer and MEncoder 1.4 beta1 (MorphOS Team)
- add RNORadio 1.2 (jPV^RNO)
- add RNOPublisher 1.0 (jPV^RNO)
- add a Downloads icons (Patbest)
- add Exutil 1.1.1 (Urich Beckers)
- update MUIBase 4.2 (Steffen Gutmann)
- add SilkRAW 1.2 (Domenico Lattanzi) and DCRaw 9.28 (BeWorld)

Don't hesitate to do suggestions

[EDIT]I would like to install RebelSDL plugin for Hollywood but i don't know what version to install: MorphOS or MorphOS_PowerSDL ? Thanks for your help!

[ Edité par Papiosaur 11.10.2020 - 19:07 ]

I don't think you should add any plug-in's for Hollywood (Edit: unless required for the Hollywood programs included in the pack that have not included the plug-in themselves), as it is a commercial program, and not everyone installing the Chrysalis Pack will have purchased it, (Edit: and the users who have not purchased Hollywood, don't need every Hollywood plug-in. Also, installing every Hollywood plug-in globally will currently waste valuable RAM each time a Hollywood program is run).

I also suggest that you make the installation work on any version of MorphOS3.14 and later, so that when MorphOS3.15 is released, you won't need to make a new Chrysalis Pack right away, and can update your pack only when you have additional software and updates to add.

[ Edited by amigadave 09.10.2020 - 08:14 ]

Hello amigadave

The Hollywood plugins are free and used by many software in the pack.

About Chrysalis pack installation and next version of MorphOS, there is a variable in the installation script test if the last version of MorphOS is installed. I can change quickly for next MorphOS release it's not a problem. I can realize updates or not if the new release arrive quickly .

Thanks for your return

> I don't think you should add any plug-in's for Hollywood,
> as it is a commercial program, and not everyone installing
> the Chrysalis Pack will have purchased it.

https://www.hollywood-mal.com/download.html

The philosophy of Hollywood has always been that purchasing it isn't required to run Hollywood programs but to create them.

Quote:

Yes, I know that, but if anyone is creating software with Hollywood that requires certain plug-ins so that it can run, I would expect the developer of such software to include the plug-ins in their download.

Seems kind of dumb to offer any software program and then tell the person who wants to run it to go download the Hollywood player, or any of its plug-ins, before the downloader can run that software. It's different when a developer is making a port of something which requires data files that are not freely available. Then I can understand that the software will not run without additional effort to acquire those data files.

Maybe I am missing some point as to why any Hollywood created software would NOT include everything needed to allow it to run? Just doesn't make sense to me, other than to save hd disk space, because you don't need multiple folders with the same player and plug-ins, but it has been a very long time since we really needed to worry about hd size on Amiga, or MorphOS systems with multiple gigabytes of space so easily and cheaply available.

>>> I don't think you should add any plug-in's for Hollywood,
>>> as it is a commercial program, and not everyone installing
>>> the Chrysalis Pack will have purchased it.

>> https://www.hollywood-mal.com/download.html
>> The philosophy of Hollywood has always been that purchasing
>> it isn't required to run Hollywood programs but to create them.

> Yes, I know that

Then I'm not sure why you stressed that Hollywood was a "commercial program" and that some Chrysalis users haven't "purchased it". To my mind, this would only make sense in a world where the Hollywood plugins are part of the Hollywood purchase and not freely downloadable, which btw would also mean that Hollywood programs weren't allowed to be distributed with any of those plugins. Furthermore, the Chrysalis Pack does contain Hollywood programs, which is why it also contains the required plugins. So why shouldn't the Chrysalis Pack contain any Hollywood plugins, again?

Quote:

Maybe if you better understood the rest of what I wrote in my reply, you would understand why I stressed that Hollywood (as a programming tool) is a commercial program, and only people who want to use it to create software should need the plug-ins. All software created with Hollywood should be compiled as a stand alone program, which requires the downloader to do nothing more than to double click on its icon, not go to the Hollywood site and download any plug-in that the software might require. Is that really so difficult to understand? I even gave you an example of the type of software that I would expect would need additional files in order to work, such as a port of a commercial product, where the data files would be needed, in order for the port to work. Hollywood makes it very easy to compile software as a stand alone executable, which includes the player, and unless I am mistaken, it would also include any plug-in needed to run such software. If that is not the case, I stand corrected, and the inclusion of Hollywood plug-ins in something like the Chrysalis Pack make sense.

I agree with amigadave in theory, but in practise it might make sense to settle in a compromise, where some of the plugins could be placed in the Chrysalis pack. But in any case, I wouldn't dump all the found plugins in the distribution without consideration either.

I prefer making stand-alone Hollywood programs myself, because you can include the required plugins in the program distribution either by linking them into executable or just placing them in the program directory as separate files (which I do, because users can then modify them later too).

If the author provides the plugins in either of those ways, they aren't needed to be available globally in LIBS:Hollywood/. The expense is, as amigadave pointed out, that it consumes a bit more HD space, because you could have several Hollywood programs, which are using the same plugins. But otherwise it's more failproof method, because programs have the plugins they need in tested versions. And does it really matter with today's HD sizes? One copy of the MUI Royale plugin is something like 300-400 kB, for example.

But then some programmers have released their software without providing the required plugins or installers, and in these cases it should be thought if Chrysalis pack should provide these globally in the LIBS: or copy the required plugins separately into each programs' dirs. If Chrysalis contains these kinds of programs?

The problem with placing all possible plugins into LIBS: is that every Hollywood program loads them all when executed unless it's explicitly denied in the program startup options (I include a tooltype for this in my programs, but not everyone does that). This makes programs use more memory than they really would need, and I think that this is bigger expence than wasting the HD space by providing the needed plugins in the program distribution. The default behaviour with this is going to change in the next Hollywood version, but will still apply with all executables compiled with earlier versions.

I, as a Hollywood coder, keep only the plugins I need for my projects in LIBS:, because it's quite necessary when testing and compiling. Otherwise, from user point of view, I keep LIBS: clean of Hollywood plugins, because of the previous reason.

So, I wouldn't just dump all the existing plugins globally into Chrysalis, but maybe only those that are actually needed by the programs Chrysalis comes with.. for the programs that don't provide them for themselves. Or just put the most common and important plugins only (MUI Royale, RapaGUI), but leave more exotic or huge ones out. And definitely leave that RebelSDL out and let coders decide themselves which one they use/bundle.

Hello Amigadave,

as some already mentioned you seem not to understand the difference between the core Hollywood application and the plugins.

If the core application would be distributed that would be of course neither be moralic nor legal but the plugins are needed for most distributed software so they are intended to be distributed.

Sometimes I think people see problems where no problems are.

" All software created with Hollywood should be compiled as a stand alone program, which requires the downloader to do nothing more than to double click on its icon, not go to the Hollywood site and download any plug-in that the software might require. Is that really so difficult to understand?"

*sigh*

Again you talk about phantasy

PLugins ARE needed to be downloaded by users if not distributed by the software. What you think what "should" be is irrelevant. I for example use hollywood to show certain graphic types and play sound files and with this I already use the majority of the plugins.

Again amigans seem to be drama queens, always searching for problems or (if nothing to find) create some

I do not see that in other retro communities for unknown reasons.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 09.10.2020 - 10:25 ]

@jPv

I do not see how including the plugins harms anyone. And as soon as you use hollywood for showing different data types with a viewer or play sound (like I f.e. do) most plugins are needed already. And if there are one or two "perhaps" unnecessary plugins distributed or not is really irrelevant. Pity for the energy wasted for the senseless discussion.

Papiosaur (who does all the work) wanted suggestions but certainly expected something more "constructive" like people asking for something not included yet.

[ Editiert durch OlafSch 09.10.2020 - 10:27 ]

>>>>> I don't think you should add any plug-in's for Hollywood,
>>>>> as it is a commercial program, and not everyone installing
>>>>> the Chrysalis Pack will have purchased it.

>>>> https://www.hollywood-mal.com/download.html
>>>> The philosophy of Hollywood has always been that purchasing
>>>> it isn't required to run Hollywood programs but to create them.

>>> Yes, I know that

>> Then I'm not sure why you stressed that Hollywood was a "commercial program"
>> and that some Chrysalis users haven't "purchased it". To my mind, this would only
>> make sense in a world where the Hollywood plugins are part of the Hollywood
>> purchase and not freely downloadable, which btw would also mean that Hollywood
>> programs weren't allowed to be distributed with any of those plugins. Furthermore,
>>the Chrysalis Pack does contain Hollywood programs, which is why it also contains
>> the required plugins. So why shouldn't the Chrysalis Pack contain any Hollywood
>> plugins, again?

> Maybe if you better understood the rest of what I wrote in my reply, you would
> understand why I stressed that Hollywood (as a programming tool) is a commercial
> program, and only people who want to use it to create software should need the plug-ins.
> All software created with Hollywood should be compiled as a stand alone program,
> which requires the downloader to do nothing more than to double click on its icon,
> not go to the Hollywood site and download any plug-in that the software might require.
> Is that really so difficult to understand?

What's so difficult to understand is that despite you knowing that most Hollywood program authors do not distribute the required plugins with their programs, you tell Papiosaur that you "don't think [he] should add any plug-in's for Hollywood" to the Chrysalis Pack, which does contain Hollywood programs requiring plugins. What makes even less sense to me is the stated reasoning ("as it is a commercial program, and not everyone installing the Chrysalis Pack will have purchased it").
It's a simple fact that the Hollywood programs included in the Chrysalis Pack do not work without the required plugins installed also, so Papiosaur has no choice but to include them (other than not including the Hollywood programs in the first place) and neither the commercial nature of Hollywood itself nor the fact that most Chrysalis users didn't purchase Hollywood can change this fact or even have any relevance for this fact.

> Hollywood makes it very easy to compile software as a stand alone executable,
> which [...] would also include any plug-in needed to run such software.
> If that is not the case, I stand corrected

Regarding the specific point you are trying to make, I'm not sure about the practical difference between having the plugins included in the executable file or having them included as files in the installation archive.

Well, a reason of not include the plugins in the executables, is the size, if you make several programs or games that for example use the oggvorbis.hwp in each program or game you add 1.5 Mb extra, the best option is use the plugin installed in Libs:Holywood, in this case the Chrysalis pack supposes an important save of MB, because these MB are saved in the iso and in the hosting service and in the band width to download it also to save money with the Internet traffic in the hostings.

Quote:

Your assumption that I know that most Hollywood program authors do not distribute the required plug-ins with their programs is completely false, and you should have been able to figure that out with my explanation of how I believe Hollywood programs should be distributed as stand alone products. I could not explain it any clearer than jpv, so perhaps you should just refer to his post on this subject for any further clarification.

Papiosaur will have to include any plug-ins for software poorly distributed without the needed plug-ins, but as jpv stated, it is currently a waste of RAM to include all of the Hollywood plug-ins in LIBS, as they will ALL be loaded, when any Hollywood program is started, if they are needed or not. All Hollywood plug-ins are only needed by purchasers of the Hollywood programming language who intend to use them in their programs, and they know where to get them, and most likely have already downloaded and installed them.

Quote:


See jpv's post for the practical implications, and why currently it is not a good idea to have all Hollywood plug-ins installed in a pack intended mostly for users who do not want to "pick and choose" each piece of software they are going to install. For MorphOS, RAM is more important than hard drive space in most, if not all of the MorphOS systems. I made my suggestion, which I think was a valid one, and he can take it or leave it as he sees fit. Papiosaur is smart enough to figure out what to do, and which plug-ins to install, now that he is aware of the implications, that jpV explained clearly.

I'm done with this topic. jpv explained it much better than I did, but he completely understands my reasoning for suggesting that Papiosaur not include all Hollywood plug-ins. I won't waste space in this thread to debate coding styles, and why some Hollywood programmers do NOT include the needed plug-ins for their software. Start another thread for that if you like.

Edit: @OlafSch, if anyone started any drama in this thread, it wasn't me. I just made a simple suggestion, which another member here either did not understand, or like you, just disagrees with. Making such a big deal out of my simple suggestion is my definition of creating drama, where none existed.

[ Edited by amigadave 09.10.2020 - 08:07 ]

Hi all,

everybody is in the good

Thanks for your return and be in peace

I install all plugin because i like them
jPV include Hollywood plugin in his archives, it's good for the user.
Templario don't install them in his archive and it's better for his server.
In the pack, many software use the plugins and i cant' install plugins needeed in each software drawer.
Size of all Hollywood plugin is 16Mb, if all plugins are loaded in memory at startup maybe it's big (i didn't know that).
Maybe the best solution will be to move LIBS:Hollywood/plugins to another path for example DATA:Hollywood and add an assign like this

Assign LIBS: SYS:DATA/

Like that Plugins are not loaded at startup.

What do you think about that ?

Thanks for your return


[ Edité par Papiosaur 09.10.2020 - 18:09 ]

[ Edité par Papiosaur 09.10.2020 - 18:18 ]

> Your assumption that I know that most Hollywood program authors do not
> distribute the required plug-ins with their programs is completely false

Papiosaur told you in comment #3 that the "Hollywood plugins are [...] used by many software in the pack". Even if the Chrysalis pack contained just one single Hollywood program requiring plugins the program does not come with, Papiosaur would have to include these plugins.

> you should have been able to figure that out with my explanation of how
> I believe Hollywood programs should be distributed as stand alone products.

As OlafSch put it fittingly, you are confusing your fantasy wishes with reality. How you believe Hollywood programs should be distributed is not how most Hollywood programs are distributed in reality. Reality is what Papiosaur has to come to terms with when composing Chrysalis, which means that as soon as one or more Hollywood programs contained in Chrysalis require a plugin, this plugin must be contained in Chrysalis as well.

> I could not explain it any clearer than jpv, so perhaps you should
> just refer to his post on this subject for any further clarification.

Everything jPV wrote in this thread makes complete sense to me, opposed to the specific things I quoted from you and replied to. jPV certainly didn't recommend to not distribute any Hollywood plugins with Chrysalis. This was just you, nobody else.

> Papiosaur will have to include any plug-ins for software poorly distributed
> without the needed plug-ins

Exactly, and this contradicts what you (originally, before the edits) wrote in comment #2, which I replied to.

> it is currently a waste of RAM to include all of the Hollywood plug-ins
> in LIBS, as they will ALL be loaded, when any Hollywood program is
> started, if they are needed or not.

I was objecting to your recommendation to not make Chrysalis install ANY Hollywood plugins in Libs. A recommendation to not have it install ALL plugins I wouldn't have objected to.

> All Hollywood plug-ins are only needed by purchasers of the Hollywood
> programming language who intend to use them in their programs

I'd think that even Hollywood programmers do not necessarily need all existing plugins installed but only those they actually use in their programs. That's not really different from mere users of Hollywood programs, I'd say.

>>> Hollywood makes it very easy to compile software as a stand alone
>>> executable, which [...] would also include any plug-in needed to run
>>> such software. If that is not the case, I stand corrected

>> Regarding the specific point you are trying to make, I'm not sure about
>> the practical difference between having the plugins included in the
>> executable file or having them included as files in the installation archive.

> See jpv's post for the practical implications

That's not what I mean. What I mean is why you only "stand corrected" if a Hollywood executable couldn't "include any plug-in needed" when in fact it's also possible to not include them in the executable but instead put them as files in the program directory.

> I made my suggestion, which I think was a valid one

You still think that your original suggestion to not "add any plug-in's for Hollywood" is valid? Why the edits then?

> Papiosaur is smart enough to figure out what to do, and which plug-ins to install

Yes, I consider him smart enough to not follow your original suggestion.

> jpv explained it much better than I did

Indeed, I could follow everything he suggested and explained.

> he completely understands my reasoning for suggesting that
> Papiosaur not include all Hollywood plug-ins.

That's clearly not what you suggested and you know it. It's still in comment #2, between the edits, and in my unedited quotes.

> I won't [...] debate [...] why some Hollywood programmers do NOT include the
> needed plug-ins for their software. Start another thread for that if you like.

I'm not overly interested in what Hollywood programmers do or not do regarding the plugins. What I've been interested in and replied to is your original suggestion to not include ANY Hollywood plugins in Chrysalis and your rationale for this suggestion.

> @OlafSch [...] I just made a simple suggestion, which another member
> here either did not understand, or like you, just disagrees with.

Please note that I've been disagreeing with your original suggestion all along.

Quote:
This doesn't help, because plugins aren't loaded at the system startup. They are loaded when you launch a Hollywood program, and if it finds the plugins, the location doesn't matter. So, they don't consume memory unless you launch a program made with Hollywood.

If you launch a Hollywood program on a system that has all those plugins installed into LIBS:, it will consume 16 MB more memory than when launched on a system that has no plugins installed globally. This is 16 MB wasted even though the program doesn't use any of the plugins in its operation.

It will also slow down the program startup little, on my Powerbook 1.67GHz a simple test program took 1.64 seconds to start when I had all plugins available, and 0.45 seconds when I didn't have the plugins available. This is noticeable difference if you start/quit a program often/constantly, especially if you'd have a slower machine.

Hollywood plugins also aren't shared libraries even though they reside in the libs: directory. If you launch another program while the first one is running, it can't use the plugins that are loaded in the memory by other program, but loads all plugins again. The more you have programs running, the more memory is wasted. With the currently available plugins, it actually isn't the whole 16 MB next programs take, because the Polybios plugin makes an exception as it contains an external decoder program that is shared by other instances of the actual plugin, and that saves over 6 MB for the next launches, but almost 10 MB still.

So it's a decision between wasting 10-16 MB (minus the required plugins) per running program + slower startup of programs, or wasting a bit HD space for having exactly the required plugins for each program.

I think this behaviour was designed to make the plugins work a bit like Datatypes, user could install a new picture plugin and his picture viewer would then automatically recognize the new format etc. But it's revealed to be quite rare situation in practise, and that's why the next Hollywood version stops loading all global plugins at program startup, only plugins requested by the program will be loaded then unless otherwise defined. There are just too many drawbacks compared to the gain with the current default behaviour.

I'd say that typical programs usually need only 0-3 plugins, so unless it's a monsterous bloated all-in-one program, it's a total waste to load all 30 plugins for each running program in my opinion.

Hi jPV,

In fact, I think it will be fine if software created by Hollywood launched only plugins used.

I don't think many MorphOS users use many Hollywood programme in the same time...

So I think for the moment i will keep Hollywood plugins in LIBS:Hollywood/

Thanks a lot for all these precisions !!!

Quote:
All is possible, there are people very strange. ;)

Quote:

That's right

Chrysalis pack for MorphOS 3.14 is available here :

https://www.morphos-storage.net/?id=1588203

Thanks for your returns

[ Edité par Papiosaur 23.10.2020 - 19:35 ]

Quote:

Hello,

I am new to MorphOS, which I have discovered just this week. I am trying to download Chrysalis, but the link above gets me to a blank page.

Can you please provide any help?

thnak you so much

It looks like that page, and the Chrysalis Pack for v3.14 is currently offline. Maybe someone from the MorphOS-Storage website, or the WArMUp website team are working on a "tweak" to it, so it may be worth sending a P.M. to papiosaur's profile, or beworld's profile and ask why it's offline, as you're probably not the only one who might want to download it while at home over the Christmas/New Year festive period.

After all Wayfarer v1.8 might need to be added to it, along with a few other applications that have appeared over the last few weeks, like VectorInk,, hURL v1.1, SDL2 Libs, Final Burn Neo, etc..

Quote:

Thank you. I have just sent a PM to papiosaur

NewSense has right

A new version is soon available

Merry Christmas to all

New version is available here :
https://www.morphos-storage.net/?id=1603238

This is the changes list:

Wayfarer 1.8 updated (jacaDcaps)
VectorInk 1.1 added (Andre Siegel)
GrafX2 2.8 WIP updated (BeWorld)
PolyBios 1.3 updated (Andreas Falkenhahn)
SDL Librairies updated (BeWorld, BSzili)
FinalBurn Neo 1.0.0.1 added (BeWorld)
Witch Cleaner 1.55 updated (Templario)
WebRadio 2.3 updated (Thomas Igracki)
MouseMeter 1.3 updated (Stefan Blixth - OnySoft)
AmiSSL 4.7 68k updated (Jens Maus)
hURL 1.1 updated (Andreas Falkenhahn)
twittAmiga 4.4.2 updated (Oliver Urbann)
GhostScript fixed
Audio mimetype fixed

Enjoy!


[ Edité par Papiosaur 25.12.2020 - 18:42 ]