Jump to content


Photo

Bug reports


12 replies to this topic

#1 aVENGER

aVENGER
  • Modder
  • 1680 posts

Posted 10 March 2010 - 05:35 AM

General guidelines for reporting bugs
  • When reporting a bug please specify which version of the game (i.e. BG2, BGT, Tutu) you are running, your Operating System (i.e. Windows 98/2000/XP/Vista/7, Linux, MacOSX...etc) and the version of aTweaks which you have installed
  • If you encounter an error during the installation procedure please post the content of your SETUP-ATWEAKS.DEBUG file. It would also be helpful to list any other mods which you have installed and their installation order as well. The easiest way to do that is to post the contents of your WeiDU.log file. Note: you can find the aforementioned files in your Baldur's Gate 2 folder
  • Before labeling any unusual behavior as bugs, please carefully review the documentation which comes with the aTweaks mod, especially the "Known Issues" section
  • Feel free to report any spelling or grammar mistakes which you notice in the dialogues or the item/kit/ability descriptions which were introduced by aTweaks
  • For reference, resolved bug reports from earlier mod versions are archived here. False positives and problems caused by local issues are moved here.

Edited by Wisp, 25 July 2012 - 08:01 AM.


#2 Wisp

Wisp
  • Modder
  • 1333 posts

Posted 01 January 2014 - 05:32 AM

Not a bug, but don't forget about this feedback.



#3 Periel

Periel
  • Member
  • 14 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 09:48 AM

Microsoft Security Essentials just quarantined the v4.52 EXE download here, saying it was infected with Trojan:Win32/Tiggre!plock - can I suggest this is repacked (perhaps as a Zip rather than a self-extracting EXE) urgently.


Edited by Periel, 31 January 2018 - 09:48 AM.


#4 Creepin

Creepin
  • Coordinator
  • 980 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 11:09 AM

Microsoft Security Essentials just quarantined the v4.52 EXE download here, saying it was infected with Trojan:Win32/Tiggre!plock - can I suggest this is repacked (perhaps as a Zip rather than a self-extracting EXE) urgently.

Not a bug: really, modders can't be expected to jump each time some crappy antivirus shat its pants. Normal course of actions in cases like this is to contact a developer and demand file in question to be marked as clean.


The Old Gold - v0.1 WIP (mod for BGT/BWP/BWS)


#5 subtledoctor

subtledoctor
  • Member
  • 520 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 12:29 PM

OTOH I think distributing in .exe format is obnoxious in its own right. But people will probably disagree and that's fine.

#6 Creepin

Creepin
  • Coordinator
  • 980 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 12:39 PM

OTOH I think distributing in .exe format is obnoxious in its own right.

I hate it too, thankfully it's a rare sight nowadays :)


Edited by Creepin, 31 January 2018 - 12:46 PM.

The Old Gold - v0.1 WIP (mod for BGT/BWP/BWS)


#7 Periel

Periel
  • Member
  • 14 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 01:44 PM

Not a bug: really, modders can't be expected to jump each time some crappy antivirus shat its pants. Normal course of actions in cases like this is to contact a developer and demand file in question to be marked as clean.

 

That presupposes that that the file IS clean. Or that end users should willy-nilly ignore an AV positive, even if possibly false. If you start from the ridiculous position (as you seem to be arguing) that all anonymously provided EXE files downloaded from the internet are clean and that your AV routinely lies to you, then THAT is a security nightmare waiting to happen and you frankly deserve to get infected for your stupidity.

 

I'd point out that this is almost the only file threat that MSE has ever picked up for me in years of use, and this is the very last place I'd have expected to find a positive, false or not. That to me suggests that far from being a poor AV, it's actually LESS likely to give the false positives many other AVs throw up, and is exactly WHY I took notice of this (and reported it propmptly).

 

I'd agree with subtledoctor - self-uninstalling packages are the issue, NOT my or anyone else's AV, when there's no functional difference to providing a less opaque zip file like everybody else, and less risk involved if people are (bizarrely) in the habit of ignoring threats when they download stuff. And if it's not a bug, then where else should I post this? Putting it here allows others to confirm (or report clear) what their AV tells them. And if the modder has changed the way they pack the file recently (the v4.51 file doesn't give a positive) then they are now aware that their newer packer may have an issue, which is also helpful.

 

What isn't helpful is sneering about a choice of AV and suggesting that positives should just be ignored, and that they are never the responsibility of the person who compiled the file as they are always false (in your opinion). Because even if you're right THIS time, next time you WILL get bitten.



#8 subtledoctor

subtledoctor
  • Member
  • 520 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 02:12 PM

I should elaborate, after using an incendiary term like "obnoxious."

I don't think that the idea of packaging a mod in a self-extracting archive - in effect, giving the mod an installer - is necessarily a bad thing. It's bad for cross-platform compatibility, because if a Mac or Linux user just wants to supply our own copy of Weidu and just get the mod folder and included files, we can't gee at them.

But still, it's a reasonable packagong decision if it makes installation easier for the Windows user. I grant that completely.

Problem is, I don't think it's any easier for Windows users. 99.9% of the people installing this mod will aldo install several others, and those mods will likely be packaged in the traditional zipped[folder+Weidu] format. So users will have to ise the more onerous method multiple times regardless of how this mod is packaged. The overall advantage of the .exe package is thus negligible, and in fact the deviation from the norm (even if it's better than the norm) can end up being confusing and less efficient.

And Windows users who really want to maximize ease-of-installation will tend toward using BWS, and BWS would actually prefer that mods not use .exe packages.

So tl;dr: I appreciate the intent behind this decision, but I don't think the execution is successful.

#9 Periel

Periel
  • Member
  • 14 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 04:27 PM

It's worth adding: this forum is quite old - I don't know how assiduous the maintainers are with patching/updating the software and therefore how hardened it is security-wise. It's hardly beyond the bounds of possibility that it could have been hacked and a file replaced with another with a malicious payload. It can happen to the most tech-conscious hosters - remember how the Linux Mint repository was hacked with a compromised version a year or so ago, to their extreme embarrassment...

 

Therefore alerting on a positive is surely ALWAYS a good idea. It's safer for the original modder or admin staff to independently check the file with a known good version than just shooting the messenger. :(



#10 Creepin

Creepin
  • Coordinator
  • 980 posts

Posted 31 January 2018 - 10:09 PM

That presupposes that that the file IS clean. Or that end users should willy-nilly ignore an AV positive, even if possibly false. If you start from the ridiculous position (as you seem to be arguing) that all anonymously provided EXE files downloaded from the internet are clean and that your AV routinely lies to you, then THAT is a security nightmare waiting to happen and you frankly deserve to get infected for your stupidity.

If you cared to read carefully you'd noticed I only referred to ignoring positives while dealing with IE mods.

 

AND if you were around for some years you would know that WeiDU has a history of being detected as a false positive by various AV through time, which obviously doesn't make WeiDU any worse, only demonstrate what a crappy bunch these AVs are.

 

So yes, healthy and reasonable reaction within IE community is to ignore yet another half-assed AV for throwing yet another fit at the mod.

 

By the way, Virustotal gives 11/65 result, which  marks the file as false positive.


Edited by Creepin, 31 January 2018 - 10:22 PM.

The Old Gold - v0.1 WIP (mod for BGT/BWP/BWS)


#11 Wisp

Wisp
  • Modder
  • 1333 posts

Posted 02 February 2018 - 10:22 AM

The zip is here. Go nuts.

 

I'd also like to discontinue the self-extracting packages, but last I heard, some users liked them and/or were lost without them.



#12 Mythicalc

Mythicalc
  • Member
  • 1 posts

Posted 17 February 2018 - 12:31 PM

The zip is here. Go nuts.

 

I'd also like to discontinue the self-extracting packages, but last I heard, some users liked them and/or were lost without them.

 

Question:

 

I'm getting a virus blocker on the latest version, so trying the independent version. I wouldn't necessarily say i'm "lost" without a self-extractor, but I'd like to understand the installation package instructions better. 

 

It's my understanding, in most cases, I just need to grab the weidu executable and rename it "setup-atweaks," which is usually what i've done for mods lacking them. 

 

As such, I'm getting a ton of errors doing so, and looking at the instructions I've no clue what you mean by binaries and paths (I'm assuming "paths" mean the BG2 directory. Binaries are all the additional files I usually ignore in the weidu package?).

 

Otherwise, I really understand not falling over backwards because of Virus scans, but in fairness after installing 30 mods by myself this is the only one that's acted up on me. 

 

Really love and appreciate this mod and would love to get it working.



#13 The Imp

The Imp

    Not good, see EVIL is better. You'll LIVE.

  • Member
  • 4440 posts

Posted 17 February 2018 - 01:13 PM

.... As such, I'm getting a ton of errors doing so,
Did you extract the content of the .zip archive into the game folder, so that the content is still in the archives native folder, the "atweaks", cause if you remove the subfolder structure, every mod will throw errors at you, as well as if the folder is inside a default "atweaks-v452" folder that some archive tools propose, it will do the same thing, as it's not directly inside the game folder.

Yep, Jarno Mikkola. my Mega Mod FAQ. Use of the BWS, and how to use it(scroll down that post a bit). 
OK, desert dweller, welcome to the sanity, you are free to search for the limit, it's out there, we drew it in the sand. Ouh, actually it was still snow then.. but anyways.




Reply to this topic