Atomic Systems

g0fthick wrote: If anyone finds any issues or problems regarding this route, please report them to Dean via this topic.

Enjoy!

g0fthick, I cant access the forum, so I thought I tell you that there "may" be a problem with the .rpk file in that when it updates the route.xml it corrupts the file ( most likely due to a xml syntax error ). This means that when someone installs say a scenario afterwards ( as in my case ) it removes the route the scenario relates to from the route list in the game.

I only say this because of what RSadam said about this type of problem and that when it happens it will be due to the last thing you installed before installing the item where you notice it. I hope that makes sense.

John

Odd that, I'll pass it on to Dean.

Announcement

Cinder Lane V2 is now available to download, this adds siding markers and removed unnecessary scenarios.

Does the latest version fix the .xml corruption problem? I downloaded and installed V1 and ended up having to reinstall RS to recover.

latimers wrote:Does the latest version fix the .xml corruption problem? I downloaded and installed V1 and ended up having to reinstall RS to recover.

I think it has, after installing I can open the routes.xml file in microsoft xml editor with no errors which I couldn't before.

John

Edit - Sorry to say that when I installed another scenario after installing V2 just now I lost the Bath route again

Another Update

For those having XML issues, we have now fixed the issue and you can download the fix from Digital Traction's download area.

I just downloaded and installed v2.1 on the basis that the DT website says it has been checked out by RDSL.

Before doing that I backed up my Content folder and checked routes.xml with XML Notepad and it was fine.

After installation, routes.xml had errors. It looks like the problem isn't fixed.

Or perhaps there's a problem with my routes.xml already and it's just installing Cinder Lane v2.1 that makes it evident. Anyone know the real answer?

latimers wrote:I just downloaded and installed v2.1 on the basis that the DT website says it has been checked out by RDSL.

Before doing that I backed up my Content folder and checked routes.xml with XML Notepad and it was fine.

After installation, routes.xml had errors. It looks like the problem isn't fixed.

Or perhaps there's a problem with my routes.xml already and it's just installing Cinder Lane v2.1 that makes it evident. Anyone know the real answer?

The real test is to install something after it, if there is a problem that is when it will appear.

John

OK, before installing Cinder Lane 2.1 I installed a scenario for the PO&N route and the route didn't disappear from the routes list in RS. After installing Cinder Lane 2.1 I tried to install a scenario for the York route and the York route disappeared off the routes list in RS.

Is it only the installation of routes that can cause problems with routes.xml? Can the installation of a scenario do the same thing?

latimers wrote: Can the installation of a scenario do the same thing?

I believe so.

John

latimers wrote:OK, before installing Cinder Lane 2.1 I installed a scenario for the PO&N route and the route didn't disappear from the routes list in RS. After installing Cinder Lane 2.1 I tried to install a scenario for the York route and the York route disappeared off the routes list in RS.

I don't know what error you got but when I just tried it then the routes.xml did get mucked up again but for me the error was much easier to fix. With mine at the end of the routes.xml when opened in notepad ( not xml notepad ) there was a extra </Record> entry. I deleted it and then saved the file. When I opened it again the file was no longer mucked up.

Tomorrow I will try installing a scenario to see if all is ok.

John

I think, from memory, that's the same error that XML Notepad flagged after I installed V2.1. I wasn't about to dive in and try to fix it myself and neither, I suspect, are at least 95% of RS users.

My aim is to prove or disprove (and at the moment it looks like "prove") that the problem is still coming for Cinder Lane. If that is the case then hopefully the Digital Traction guys can fix it. It's a very nice route from what I saw, so hopefully it can be straightened out.

latimers wrote:I think, from memory, that's the same error that XML Notepad flagged after I installed V2.1. I wasn't about to dive in and try to fix it myself and neither, I suspect, are at least 95% of RS users.

My aim is to prove or disprove (and at the moment it looks like "prove") that the problem is still coming for Cinder Lane. If that is the case then hopefully the Digital Traction guys can fix it. It's a very nice route from what I saw, so hopefully it can be straightened out.

Well after a little bit of investigation I have fixed the problem with Cinder Lane V2.1 on my RS install. I corrected the .rpk file and installed it then checked by installing a scenario and checking everything was ok and as a double check I installed another one and all is where it should be.

The problem was not that there was a extra </Record> but there were two </Record> entries. I checked some other .rpk files and none of them had a </record> at the end of the xml.

Anyway I have sent the corrected Cinder Lane V2.1 .rpk to DT so they can compare it and double check it if they want explaining how and what I did to find the error.

Here's hoping that it all will be sorted soon.

John

According to the DT forum, (and I couldn't find it after a quick look) that Cinder lane has been withdrawn altogether and sent off the RSDL for a look see, as the Ver 2 didn't fix the issue. It is interesting that something aparantly so simple can cause so much irritation now within the program

Oh well...

after installing this route i seem to have lost the bath route too, any way i can get it back without re-installing guys?