1
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Crash - Unhandled exception
« on: April 02, 2021, 08:08:08 PM »
I rolled back to 2021.08 and the problem does not occur for me on that version. Only 2021.10.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages: [1]
2
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Crash - Unhandled exception
« on: April 02, 2021, 08:01:00 PM »
I also am getting this issue. I tried to clone a group and got the mentioned exception. When I click any button on the exception window (Abort, Retry or Ignore) the exception window closes and a new one immediately opens. The only way out appears to be to use the End Task stick.
For what it's worth, a screen snip of the window I get is attached.
Bob
For what it's worth, a screen snip of the window I get is attached.
Bob
3
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Windows 10 won't run the 2018.59 installer
« on: December 30, 2018, 03:47:40 PM »
Thanks Gil.
I came back to it this evening and it downloaded fine this time.
I came back to it this evening and it downloaded fine this time.
4
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Resolved: Windows 10 won't run the 2018.59 installer
« on: December 30, 2018, 12:50:27 PM »
When xlights opened today there was a prompt for an update to 2018.59. I downloaded it but Win10 doesn't like it. It shows: "This app can't run on your PC"
Looking at the file listing, the new installer is much smaller than the recent installers.
Looking at the file listing, the new installer is much smaller than the recent installers.
5
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Rendering error after upgrade to 2018.57
« on: December 28, 2018, 10:10:19 PM »
Thanks very much. .58 fixed problems I was having with P1p panels.
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk
6
Lilia Sequences / Re: Lilia Sequences Info
« on: November 13, 2018, 02:19:52 PM »
The store for Lilia's sequences - http://www.nutcracker123.com/store/index.php - has been updated with new video links. So you can watch her sequences again.
She's very talented and produces lovely work. I'm glad they're back because I find them quite inspiring. Too many to buy all of, so it's great to be able to view the whole set once more.
She's very talented and produces lovely work. I'm glad they're back because I find them quite inspiring. Too many to buy all of, so it's great to be able to view the whole set once more.
7
Lilia Sequences / Re: Lilia Sequences Info
« on: October 19, 2018, 05:55:03 AM »
So it looks like some of Sean's videos were subject to a DMCA complaint, and those show a notice of the complaint when you visit the URL for those videos. The rest of Sean's vimeo videos are just showing up with the "couldn't find that page" notice. Even his home page at https://vimeo.com/nutcracker123 is showing up as not found.
It's sad that people can't exhibit their creativity with lights without invoking the ire of the recording industry.
It's sad that people can't exhibit their creativity with lights without invoking the ire of the recording industry.
8
Lilia Sequences / Re: Lilia Sequences Info
« on: October 18, 2018, 07:59:40 PM »
The videos for the sequences on vimeo have disappeared. They were there a day or two ago, but now they all return a page saying "Sorry, we couldn’t find that page".
Did they move somewhere else?
Did they move somewhere else?
9
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Bulk Edit not working on Single Strand effect
« on: June 24, 2018, 10:06:37 AM »
Good news and thanks. I really appreciate all you guys do to make xLights happen for us hobbyists.
Maybe include a Donate button in your signatures?
- It's okay - I know where to go.
Bob
Maybe include a Donate button in your signatures?
- It's okay - I know where to go.Bob
10
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Bulk Edit not working on Single Strand effect
« on: June 23, 2018, 05:45:09 PM »
I'm running 2018.16.
The gist of the problem is that bulk edit isn't working on Single Strand effect. I can right-click a slider in the Single Strand effect and bring up the bulk effect dialogue, slide the slider, and click OK to close the dialogue, but the edit is applied to at most 1 of the selected effects.
To reproduce:
1 - Place at least 2 Single Strand effects on compatible models, select the Skips tab for each.
2 - Select at least 2 of the effects.
3 - Right click Skip Size (or any of the other parameters) and choose Bulk Edit.
4 - In the Bulk Edit window change the setting, then Click OK.
5 - Observe that only 1 effect has the edit applied. (Could be zero effects - depends on how you make your selections in step 2.)
rgbeffects and a small test sequence have been upload for reference.
Details:
I observed this with my star, which is a model consisting of 270 nodes. The lights are organized into 6 concentric stars, and there is 1 sub-model for each of these. I have an alternating effect created by putting a Single Strand effect, Skip tab, on each sub-model, where the parameters are all the same, except for the Band Size which varies by sub-model. I wanted to experiment with varying some parameters to see what I might get, so I tried bulk edit, but after applying the edit, only 1 (or zero) of the selected effects had the edit applied.
Items from the Color settings can be bulk edited for my Single Strand effects. I tried Brightness, Sparkles, and Hue and all edits worked as expected. None of the Single Strand/Skips settings worked as expected with bulk edit.
I also tried putting Single Strand/Skips on a pair of poly-line models, and observed the same problem, so it doesn't appear to be specific to sub-models.
The gist of the problem is that bulk edit isn't working on Single Strand effect. I can right-click a slider in the Single Strand effect and bring up the bulk effect dialogue, slide the slider, and click OK to close the dialogue, but the edit is applied to at most 1 of the selected effects.
To reproduce:
1 - Place at least 2 Single Strand effects on compatible models, select the Skips tab for each.
2 - Select at least 2 of the effects.
3 - Right click Skip Size (or any of the other parameters) and choose Bulk Edit.
4 - In the Bulk Edit window change the setting, then Click OK.
5 - Observe that only 1 effect has the edit applied. (Could be zero effects - depends on how you make your selections in step 2.)
rgbeffects and a small test sequence have been upload for reference.
Details:
I observed this with my star, which is a model consisting of 270 nodes. The lights are organized into 6 concentric stars, and there is 1 sub-model for each of these. I have an alternating effect created by putting a Single Strand effect, Skip tab, on each sub-model, where the parameters are all the same, except for the Band Size which varies by sub-model. I wanted to experiment with varying some parameters to see what I might get, so I tried bulk edit, but after applying the edit, only 1 (or zero) of the selected effects had the edit applied.
Items from the Color settings can be bulk edited for my Single Strand effects. I tried Brightness, Sparkles, and Hue and all edits worked as expected. None of the Single Strand/Skips settings worked as expected with bulk edit.
I also tried putting Single Strand/Skips on a pair of poly-line models, and observed the same problem, so it doesn't appear to be specific to sub-models.
11
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Re: Check Sequence Reports Incorrect Overlap Channels
« on: October 09, 2017, 01:40:03 PM »
And you are correct. I changed the number of strings from 6 to 1 and the warnings disappeared from the check sequence report. Thank you for pointing that out. It makes perfect sense, but I missed it myself. I have to get used to the idea that the number of strings represents the number of controller ports, and not the parts of the model, or other abstraction.
12
Bugs in xLights/Nutcracker / Check Sequence Reports Incorrect Overlap Channels
« on: October 07, 2017, 11:18:15 AM »
The Check Sequence tool is reporting overlaps with my star model and several models that follow it in start-channel order. I appears that the Check Sequence tool may be using end-channel as number-of-channels and calculating a new end channel that is too high. On the Layout tab the channel information looks correct and no overlaps are detected there.
I'm attaching Layout and Setup screen captures, and the check sequence report.
Additional details:
I have a star model consisting of 6 concentric stars of sizes 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, for a total of 270 nodes, or 810 channels. In Layout the star starts at Universe 103, channel 1.
I am moving from Vixen3 to xLights, and my lights last year worked well with these universe settings in Vixen3 and on my J1Sys P12S controller and on my FPP.
I have a controller with older software that supports 1 universe per output, so I put universe 103 on one port and made it 120 nodes (360 channels) long. Starting channel for universe 103 is 562 and the end channel is 921.
Universe 104 starts just after universe 103's end channel at 922 and is 150 nodes, or 450 channels long. The end channel is 1371.
The Layout screen correctly shows the start starting at #103:1 (562) and ending at #104:450 (1371).
The next model starts on #105:1 (1372), as expected.
Enabling Overlap Checks shows no detected overlaps on the layout screen.
The Check Sequence report contains:
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'House Stars 7-9' (1390-1398).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'House-Stars-1-6' (1372-1389).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Lamp-Post-Spiral' (1405-1848).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Lamp-Post-Star' (1399-1401).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Wreath' (1849-1998).
So the report is showing the star as going from channel 562 to channel 1932 instead of 562 to 1371. Interestingly, 562 to 1932 is 1371 channels, but 1371 is the expected end channel, not the number of channels.
Edit: using xLights 2017.30 - 64 bit.
I'm attaching Layout and Setup screen captures, and the check sequence report.
Additional details:
I have a star model consisting of 6 concentric stars of sizes 70, 60, 50, 40, 30, 20, for a total of 270 nodes, or 810 channels. In Layout the star starts at Universe 103, channel 1.
I am moving from Vixen3 to xLights, and my lights last year worked well with these universe settings in Vixen3 and on my J1Sys P12S controller and on my FPP.
I have a controller with older software that supports 1 universe per output, so I put universe 103 on one port and made it 120 nodes (360 channels) long. Starting channel for universe 103 is 562 and the end channel is 921.
Universe 104 starts just after universe 103's end channel at 922 and is 150 nodes, or 450 channels long. The end channel is 1371.
The Layout screen correctly shows the start starting at #103:1 (562) and ending at #104:450 (1371).
The next model starts on #105:1 (1372), as expected.
Enabling Overlap Checks shows no detected overlaps on the layout screen.
The Check Sequence report contains:
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'House Stars 7-9' (1390-1398).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'House-Stars-1-6' (1372-1389).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Lamp-Post-Spiral' (1405-1848).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Lamp-Post-Star' (1399-1401).
WARN: Probable model overlap 'CoroStar' (562-1932) and 'Wreath' (1849-1998).
So the report is showing the star as going from channel 562 to channel 1932 instead of 562 to 1371. Interestingly, 562 to 1932 is 1371 channels, but 1371 is the expected end channel, not the number of channels.
Edit: using xLights 2017.30 - 64 bit.
Pages: [1]