Author Topic: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats  (Read 4573 times)

Offline ChilliBean

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« on: March 07, 2010, 04:48:22 PM »
Hi everyone, how do I remove certain set of files from the dats using clrmames set information tool?
I know you can put in b;o in brackets etc but it seems to either deselt everything or does nothing.

love the TOSEC.




Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #1 on: March 07, 2010, 08:12:46 PM »
Hi,

i don't know what clrmame set information tool is since i don't use the tool for a long time now, i have to look at it one of these days.
Excluding flags may be a bit hard using it. We want to provide a way to create filtered dats based on the complete ones, which dats are you trying to use and excluding which flags?

Bye :)

Offline Symmo

  • TOSEC Contributor
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2010, 08:16:15 PM »
hi Chilli bean

I looked into the set information thing had me interested what u meant.
Anyways that is a uneeded mask ,from what i take is when the scanner removes things that dont belong in the folder
for eg say u had .jpg's in there and u dont want them removed it will mask (hide) them from the uneeded scanner.
*[b*]* would be the right mask? seeing there is like b1 and b2 delete as well.. its not a rebuilder exclude mask. Just look in the clrmame docs in the folder for more info.

If u dont want bad roms or anything else

1.from a console in windows del *[b*]* (test first)
2.use this http://symmo.net/tosec/ListTool.zip listtool its old but very handy only supports old version dats but tosec ones are right
I did a test on tosec sega megadrive games and loaded the dat in clicked filter and used *[b*]* and appears to work.
But click the down arrow and the end of the input line its got a lot codes from roms already done :-) just find the one that works for u.

Heres a link to wildcards http://www.linfo.org/wildcard.html (gonna have a refresh course as well lol)

Well hope it helps u i tried :-)
« Last Edit: March 09, 2010, 08:18:25 PM by Symmo »
Try this as your wallpaper if you are new :-) http://symmo.net/tosec/tosectnc.png

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #3 on: March 09, 2010, 11:29:06 PM »
Hi Symmo :)

Good post full of information, i guess it will serve for most of cases but i have something to point since i can see it catching some false positives.
First of all i'm not sure if the * can represent no chars so [b*] can catch [ b] cases too.
Second it will catch any more info fields that match that pattern, cases like Title (19xx)(Publisher)[boot] for example.
Third and the last i can remember for now, there are flags that are even harder to catch (and i'm only talking about dump info flags). For example the translation and trained flags are very similar and a "*[t*]*" to catch trained sets only will also catch translated ones as well as any more info field starting with [t*].

Don't know if it handles regular expressions but if so you have better (and more complex :P) ways to deal with it and i can help with it too.
I've a parser to our naming convention but unfortunately don't have much time currently to create some tool to filter dats right now, maybe in a couple of weeks or months :(

Anyway good work and keep posting your new findings, they can help others too.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2010, 11:35:26 PM by PandMonium »

Offline Symmo

  • TOSEC Contributor
  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #4 on: March 10, 2010, 12:28:36 AM »
Hi Mate

Didn't realize there was boot etc.. then [ b] then *[b1]* or *[b?]* <-? etc... would just be done in multiple goes.
And expression are more complex would love to learn how to use them better for they can do fullon matches.

bye
« Last Edit: March 10, 2010, 12:46:00 AM by PandMonium »
Try this as your wallpaper if you are new :-) http://symmo.net/tosec/tosectnc.png

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #5 on: March 10, 2010, 12:50:44 AM »
edited your post just to change
Code: [Select]
[b] to [ b]since it means bold in bbcode :P

Yes you could always split it in multiple cases [b1] is never used but splitting it could work for the [ b] one, the other part is harder since it could always be a more info label.
If you could use regular expressions (i never tried so i don't know what is supported there), you could create more complex patterns and catch them better, like any parser would do. For example "\[b[0-9]* [A-z0-9]\]" would catch it better (i know it will catch [b0] and only accepts chars and numbers as bad dump descriptor but this is just an untested example that can be wrong :P)

Offline ChilliBean

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 3
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #6 on: March 09, 2011, 03:54:11 PM »
Hi

I finally came to the conclusion that it's better to collect the crap as well as the good, saves you having files left on your computer when you rebuild and you have no idea what they are (should I keep them or delete them, the dilema)
Plus when you use the files you just ignore the bads and you know the goods will work (emulation depending of course). So basically I bought bigger drives and keep full TOSEC collections now.

Thank you to all who replied.

Case closed

Offline PandMonium

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1316
Re: Removing bad, overdump etc from dats
« Reply #7 on: March 09, 2011, 05:28:38 PM »
Nice to know ChilliBean,

Actually that is exactly the reason why i support having the extra 'garbage' in our database, to be able to identify what each file is, after all that is one of our goals. It is important to have them in the dats to be able to identify them so users don't keep submitting the same garbage files to be added. On the other hand, i understand users not wanting them and there should be a way to users ignore those, it is not that hard after all. Hopefully we will have it someday.

Cya