Gta San Andreas Install
Daría Davino
I have tried been able to get the file for this game before from rockstar usa. But I am not able to find the file any more and I need it to install the game. This is truly the biggest pains in my ass I have ever had to deal with. this is what the error says. File: E:\data2.cab
Error: data error (cyclic redundancy check)
Find another installation method and please try a trustworthy one ;)
Or i never tried it but Email Rockstar that you got a broken DVD and maybe they give you a free digital version. I don't know how Rockstars deals with this.
Copy your DVD's data2.cab file to your HDD/SSD and do a hash check on it there. Follow the link in my last post if you don't have a checksum utility yet.
If the checksum matches mine, your file (and hence your install) is okay. If it doesn't match, your file is corrupted.
GTA_Phreak posted...
Yes it is, - just make a copy of the installation folder (usually in Program Files\Rockstar Games\GTA San Andreas). And make a new shortcut to the copied gta_sa.exe.
Installing multiple copies from the disc will probably fail due to registry keys.
Beware that the copies will share the same user files (save games and settings).
Tried only installing the trees, also removed mod folder and tried a fresh one, installed just Redux, NVR and the trees plus IVpack (one that was actually recommended in instructions) config.xml, still same issue. I also had to add a line in dlclist.xml that wasn't even mentioned in the provided instructions for the game to actually load in. Found this on a youtube instructional.
@Breacherman It's the latest update for GTA 5, Do you have all of your mods updated? and also I wouldn't recommend having Redux, NVR and VisualV installed at the same time, it kinda messes up your game, I've installed Forest of San Andreas a few days ago and uninstalled it because of hardware problems, What's your PC Spec? FPS with all the current mods installed? and lastly uhh when your game crashes do you get any error codes, names, and etc? ex. failed zlib call.
Remove or reset all the keys installed in your system by removing the /etc/pacman.d/gnupg directory (as root) and by rerunning pacman-key --init followed by pacman-key --populate to re-add the default keys.
@Andreas: Thank you very much for your patience and help in this configuration.
Thanks to your help I have managed to monitor Nutanix devices in Check_mk.
After installing mkp just activate the rule from Check_mk, the rule is called Nutanix Prism.
In it, it asks you for data such as the port, a username and password, these data are provided by the person in charge of these devices on behalf of the client.
I directed them to my folder where I saved the devices and in the explicit hosts part I added those that are clustered and now in all of them I can see what they are monitoring.
This is it. After months of tweeting memes about mvn clean install I decided to get some numbers to see how performance would be affected when switching from one command to the other. But first a bit of history. Like many developers when faced with building a Maven project the first reaction is to invoke mvn clean install, after all you find that instruction in almost every README or BUILD file, so why question it? It does not matter if the project is single or contains multiple modules, the instruction is the same. As a matter of fact when the build contains multiple projects invoking install is a hard requirement, isn't it? Otherwise sibling projects won't be able to find inter-module dependencies. Or so I thought.
Back at JCrete 2018 I had the opportunity to talk to Robert Scholte (@rfscholte) about Maven. I was facing an issue with building a subset of the Reactor and he showed me the -am -pl command flags. Part of what transpired during our sessions was captured at this post. He also pointed out that I could use verify instead of clean install or just install. I was baffled at first because I had no idea that verify existed nor what its purpose is. My first reaction to switching was along the lines of "hold on, the other projects won't compile as they need to resolve dependencies from their siblings". With a smirk on his face Robert patiently proceeded to explain the concepts behind Maven lifecycles, goals, plugin bindings, and the execution within the Reactor. Everyone in the session had a great time and the insights shared have been very valuable. If I can condense what was said back then it would be something like this:
Now note that install is the next phase after verify. This means every time you invoke install you're also invoking verify, remember that fact. Forward to November 2019, Robert presented about Maven at Devoxx BE (video), the gist of the talk is adapting to the tool's new behavior. Of course he mentioned clean install vs. verify. For historical reasons (back in the Maven 2 days) we were forced to invoke install all the time if a module in a multi-project build had a dependency on another module, because at the time, multi-project support in Maven was in the early stages. As a matter of fact it didn't began as part of core but as the maven-reactor-plugin. The lessons learned with this project were later added into core for Maven 3. The reactor now being part of core means that some of its features could be deeply linked with the rest of the plumbing, such as attaching the computed artifacts to the current session (the Reactor) so that other modules can fetch artifacts from it instead of fetching from repositories. And that particular piece of behavior is executed during the verify phase.
Another thing that may not be obvious at first is the invocation order of goals inside a Reactor. When we invoke X number of goals each one of them will be invoked in that order per module, that is, when clean install is invoked in a multi-project structure such as
It's because of this behavior that if we were to invoke install^H^Hverify on this particular build means that the artifacts produced by project1 become available to all other projects if they need them, without requesting said artifacts from a repository. The other aspect of avoiding clean install is that Maven 3 added support for incremental builds which means invoking clean defeats this feature. It's worth noting that even though Maven offers incremental build support it's the job of the plugins to enforce it. Thus if you encounter a problem when relying on incremental builds please let the Maven team or the plugin authors know that something is not working as it should.
The first invocation of mvn verify is for testing the project builds and also downloading all required dependencies and plugins to the local Maven repository, that way network access should not affect the build times. Then the repository is cleaned and the actual measurements take place. Decided to skip tests as I'm not interested in them for this experiment. This decision will be revisited later in this post. The measurements I've got can be seen in the following charts, where the blue lines are the invocations of verify and the red lines are the invocations of install. The theory says that the red lines should be a bit longer than the blue, albeit slightly. All numbers are reported in seconds.
Feel free to make your own measurements. These numbers are but a sample and should not be taken as hard facts, however they show trends. These numbers do not lend too much credibility to the advice that install is slower than verify, we can see that the differences are negligible for most cases though I would still recommend you to take measurements in your own projects, perhaps it does make a difference for you. What is clearer is the use of clean and incremental builds. In an ideal setting you wouldn't have to invoke clean at all, saving it for certain occasions where removing intermediate results is a must; there are times where testcases always require a clean slate for a particular set of directories or resources. And yes, the EAR plugin is currently broken and you must use clean and install all the time.
There are other valid uses of install in a multi-project build. Perhaps there's a testcase that requires artifact resolution in order to work; publishing artifacts to Maven Local is the quick fix. Another option would be to setup the mrm-maven-plugin (Mock Repository Manager) which exposes the Reactor artifacts as if they were available from a Maven compatible repository, the testcases would had to be updated to consume said repository. The use of this plugin is not so common because it's more convenient to invoke clean install -DskipTests than adding one more plugin to the build.
Which runs the test phase on all projects that participate in the Reactor, that means root, project1, project2, and project3. But we really just wanted to check project3 alone however we need the POMs and JARs for all its dependencies. This poses a problem given that project3 depends on project2, which depends on project1, and all of them depend on root because it's set as their parent. The alternative is thus invoking install at the root (with full Reactor or a subset)
So. Is preferring verify over clean install busted due to measured times? It certainly looks like that, but (there's always a but) it depends. Remember that install is responsible for copying artifacts from the Reactor to the local repository. If you don't need those files in the repository because running verify provides the same observable results (code works, test are green, etc) then don't invoke install at all. You'll save space. If space is not an issue on your local development machine, you might need to check if it's an issue on your CI environments. A common occurrence when invoking install and running tests on a single project is that the consumed artifacts are not the latest ones, we tend to miss a previous install and now we go down hunting for a bug that it's not even real, it was just a binary incompatibility due to stale dependencies.
df19127ead