Any recommendations on where to learn the basics of how git works? I have no idea how to use it.
Printable View
Any recommendations on where to learn the basics of how git works? I have no idea how to use it.
I thought this link would come in handy one day. We can thank @[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] for this a while back.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Maybe you can get in contact with this guy...
Maybe he still has the cache?
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
The main issue really is all of the 289 cache's contain map data that hold map objects unsupported in the 289 client. Furthermore, the one you linked me actually contains no map data. I did spend time writing a map editor to remove/replace these bad objects with ones of similar names/types, or I just removed them entirely from the map if I couldn't find a suitable replacement. You can actually find the fixed cache on my github posted in the OP. I honestly can't stress it enough, as someone who reads this in the future should honestly use my cache over any other that publicly exist right now.Quote:
Originally Posted by iGarrett [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Major and I were talking about this the other day. It's probably that the 289 cache going around isn't really a 289 but is from a revision from around there. According to Major, it's the same with 317's as he states the 317 is really 330-350.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
(You can find more of this conversation in the official Apollo discord.)
One way this can be tested for 289 is that 289 does not have Slayer. Some fast cache skimming shows there isn't any Slayer data in the 289 cache going around so it's definitively in the right area of revision, whether it's actually 289 or something similar.
It's possible that all of the 289 cache's are truly from 289, but it's probably impossible to get hold of any real 289 maps.
If anybody reading this has real 289 maps/cache, etc.. and is happy to have it public, please contact me either on this thread or in private message, it would be a great help.
Google is a great help in using basic commands, pulling, commiting, pushing etc. Just do a quick search, I promise you'll figure it out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Side Hustle [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
What even is revision 289 anyway, what update is it ? That should tell you the age of the cache.
I’m not sure that I understand your question.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Cape [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Cape [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
The 289 cache that usually roams around this place has files dating back to January 23rd, 2005, which means 3 days before slayer got released (January 26th, 2005).
As far as I recall the last time I checked the "real" 317 cache, I concluded that it's actually 333.
The issue that I see is that any type of major project that has a specific revision with missing files will end up hitting a wall (missing maps on rs2beta / 289, missing xteas on rs2hd revisions and so forth).
Cache versions are based on updates. If you know what your cache does support you can look at the update log on the rs website and figure out what version your cache actually is. I'm just wondering how people came to the conclusion that it is 289 cache. The client is clearly 289 but what are they basing the cache version on?Quote:
Originally Posted by s1mpledev [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
I've been told 317 doesn't have farming BUT I have the original 317 applet dating from 2005 and it does have the word farming n the skills array class. I personally think our versioning is completely wrongQuote:
Originally Posted by Throwaway12345 [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Edit: farming not slayer
The 317 client that nobody has the real cache for dates back to June 13th, 2005, where the last update was this:
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
This was before farming got released (in July 11th), and the reason the client has the word farming is because in June 6th they've released seeds into the game, even though they were unusable at that point, so it's very likely that they updated the arrays to prepare for the eventual release of the skill.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Edit: On a side note, 319 is one of the few caches we have archived from that era and it's one patch away from Farming's release, which makes me wonder why has there never been a functional server for that revision.
Jagex will add things to the client pre-release. Even though 289 does not have Slayer, you can find "slayer" in the skills array, similar to what you observed for 317 with Farming.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Cape [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
This is a link to the 289 client found on my Github.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] also made a comment about this a couple days ago
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
As for the "update", the earliest I can find the cache was created is January 23, 2005 which puts it around here
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
I decided to do more digging.......
One of the last npcs found in the cache is the [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]. Which was released January 17, 2005 with the Karamja dungeon.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
The last item found in the cache is the [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]. Which was released January 17, 2005 with the Karamja dungeon.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
One of the last objects found in the cache is the [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]. Which was released January 17, 2005 with the Karamja dungeon.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
We can 100% say this cache is atleast from the [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] RuneScape update from January 17, 2005.
Now it gets weird...
-According to [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] and [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...], the 289 client inside these archives are dated February 28, 2005.
-Both of these archives do not have a client dating to January 17-23, 2005
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
To confirm something with Slayer, I decided to decompile the 282 client from December 2004 and see what I find.
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
As you can see, even the December 2004 client has a reference to Slayer even though it won't be released for almost another two months.
I then decided to decompile the 294 client from one of the archives and check the same skills array
[Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
If you look closely at this specific array from both the 282 and 294 client, you will see that the 18th index from 282 is set false and in 294 it is set to true.
The 18th index of the array is for the "slayer" index from the above array. 282 is false because it is from before the Slayer release. And obviously 294 is set true for Slayer because it was released. If you go back to the first link I provided in this post, you will see that 289 has this set to false.Code:public static boolean c[] = {
true, true, true, true, true, true, true, true, true, true,
true, true, true, true, true, true, true, true, true, false,
true, false, false, false, false
};
Conclusion
-This client is 100% 289. And this is already known just by the client build number which can be found during login etc.
-This cache 100% dates between January 17, 2005 to January 23, 2005.
-This cache is 100% 289-293. Critical thinking speaking, there is no true way right now to prove this is 289. Whether the cache is 289 or not really comes down to knowing if 290-293 client has "slayer" set to true/false in that skills array. We could also check a 290-293 cache for any Slayer npcs/items. Unfortunately, I can not find any of those clients/caches. However, if Jagex incremented the client build at each update they did, we could safely determine that this cache is 100% 289
-This cache can possibly be ~282-293. More explanation can be found [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...].
Thoughts
-The maps found inside this 289 cache is 100% from another revision. This is the only explanation I can come up with about the map objects that exceed the real amount of objects inside the cache config. (Ex. Object with ID: 7000 found inside part of a region of the map, when the 289 cache only supports up to ~5000.) There is no way Jagex introduced ~2000 new objects in such small time frame.
If you didn't know, I did a cache fix to the one on my Github. I removed/replaced all of the map objects not supported by the 289 cache. This was the best way I could think of to avoid any issues when it came to using the maps which I believe did come from another revision much higher than 289.
Thanks!
I poke you with questions like that because I want a response as thorough as this, too often in this community things are just accepted as 'fact' and it's nice to see a convincing argument with well supported evidence. As for the map objects, your position on them does make sense. Curious what the highest supported object actually is? Might be able to recognise it and give you an idea if its related to any particular time.Quote:
Originally Posted by s1mpledev [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]
Good work so far