[Tolwyn]

Hmm, this is really frustrating. I tried to place a shortcut to the launcher in the start menu, but it didn't work. (The error message is as follows: The launcher must be in the same directory as the binary you are trying to use). I had the same problem with 5.3. 5.2 created ini file at the location of the shortcut instead of the FS2 dir.

[karajorma]

I've been trying this out today cause the BSG team are in the same boat.

Open up the properties for that start menu item and have a look at what the Start In field says.

[Dark Hunter]

Here's a request: The bitmap images for mods (under the mod tab). I like those, but the Launcher ran me through hell and back because my image was not exactly 255x112 pixels. I eventually got it close (to 254x112), and had to insert a line of white pixels to get it to work. The white pixels aren't noticeable, but still.

Anyway, could we make that window a little more flexible?

[Tolwyn]

I've been trying this out today cause the BSG team are in the same boat.

Open up the properties for that start menu item and have a look at what the Start In field says.

Target: "C:\Games\Wing Commander Saga Prologue\Launcher.exe"
Start In: " "

[karajorma]

That's your problem. It should say Start in "C:\Games\Wing Commander Saga Prologue\"

Instead it's trying to start somewhere in your Documents and Settings folder.

[Mars]

Is there going to be a Linux version of this?   

[Tolwyn]

In other words:

Target: "<TARGETDIR>\Launcher.exe"
Start In: "<TARGETDIR>"\

[taylor]

Anyway, could we make that window a little more flexible?

No.  That stuff isn't going to work in the new launcher so it's just a waste of time to modify the current launcher to support something that the new launcher wouldn't use anyway.  The current launcher is just getting bug fixes to hold everyone over until it's officially scrapped in favor of the new cross-platform launcher.  No new features will get in unless it's to address a particular bug (ie, getting around NAT for network IP).

Is there going to be a Linux version of this?   

Of the launcher you mean?  If so then, no.  The launcher as it is will die a sad death still stuck on the Win32 platform.  But a new launcher is in the works which is completely redesigned and will be fully cross-platform.

[taylor]

Alright, Launcher 5.5 (to be released after a little more testing, PM me if you want to test it out now) will have the following changes to how it handles the exe path:

• The launcher6.ini file can have an exe name, but no path, and the path will automatically be set to the current directory
• If the above happens, and there is no matching exe name existing in that directory, you will get the same old "same directory" error
• If there is a path and it isn't the same as the launcher directory, it will use a binary of the same name in the launcher directory, if binary of same name exists

Does that sound ok and hopefully get all of the installer issues?

You would still include a cmdline_fso.cfg file for the initial defaults (for when you don't run the launcher first), but with these changes you should also be able to include a launcher6.ini file without full path info for the exe and still be ok.

[Zacam]

An idea to help reduce some issues, is there a way to set a define in the launcher so that if it detects a problem ATI card, it invisibly set's -disable_fbo? Or is there too much variable with what kinds of cards this happens on? (As I know it's not a driver version dependant issue.) Might help cut down on posts by people who don't know how to search.

[karajorma]

Sounds good Taylor.

[Tolwyn]

Alright, Launcher 5.5 (to be released after a little more testing, PM me if you want to test it out now) will have the following changes to how it handles the exe path:

• The launcher6.ini file can have an exe name, but no path, and the path will automatically be set to the current directory
• If the above happens, and there is no matching exe name existing in that directory, you will get the same old "same directory" error
• If there is a path and it isn't the same as the launcher directory, it will use a binary of the same name in the launcher directory, if binary of same name exists

Does that sound ok and hopefully get all of the installer issues?

You would still include a cmdline_fso.cfg file for the initial defaults (for when you don't run the launcher first), but with these changes you should also be able to include a launcher6.ini file without full path info for the exe and still be ok.

Sounds like an excellent solution!

[Darklord42]

I'm pretty sure this has been asked before but in anycase, will there be a mac and linux version of the launcher anytime in the near future?  It can be a pain to remember/ enter in manualy all the commands by hand.

[karajorma]

There's already a Linux version and ironically enough when I went to get you the link I noticed that someone had just posted a Mac version too

[Trivial Psychic]

Since we have a Launcher 5.5, isn't this thread a little outdated, and no longer requiring Stickification?

[Darklord42]

What would be realy nice is if we could add a flag that adds the "-showship" for cockpit views, so people don't have to do it manuely. Bare in mind a few ships like the hercs and apollo need to be centered correctly, but that doesnt seem to hard to do.  Perhaps the launcher could read off a new text file that is edited constantly as new ships are added and people figure out what is centered for these ships.

[karajorma]

I think the exact opposite is needed actually. The launcher flag should be "Don't show cockpit" That way if you don't like them you can turn them off in a mod without extracting the tables and editing them.

It should be up to the mod in question (and that includes mediaVPs!) to turn them on.

[Darklord42]

even better, but such a table should be included with the mediavps right?

[karajorma]

Either with them or as an optional extra.

[jr2]

Since we have a Launcher 5.5, isn't this thread a little outdated, and no longer requiring Stickification?

That's 5.5a 
But couldn't we just change the name of the thread by modifying the first post?
*stares at Taylor*