Kylroi

Which version of Visual Studio (or just Visual C++) are you using?

You're on a 64-bit Windows. Did you install the 64-bit OpenSSL and compile 32-bit Trinity (or the other way around, 32-bit OpenSSL and 64-bit Trinity)?

OpenSSL is not (properly) installed.

Indeed. Issue tickets can be submitted without needing to know SQL or C++, let alone be able to follow the simple process of getting their own server running. Quite often, it's the people that don't know how things are meant to work that find broken areas. Pre-Cata, I knew of a path along the southern shore of Kalimdor that allowed access to the unfinished area south of Un'goro and Silithus. I never used a cheat to gain access to the area. There was no invisible wall to keep people out of the area. It was simply overlooked by the map builders at Blizzard because they knew there was nothing to send people to that area. As an explorer, I found it. Did I need to contribute code or database content to Blizzard to find it? Nope. I ought to grab a 3.3.5a client and set up a server to see if it's still reachable with Trinity (without cheating).

Reading a map is not a tool specifically for driving. Maps are used for many other things, too. The 2 concepts are simply separate with neither requiring the other to be of use. They may work together, but that's it. With your logic, then you and anyone else unable to get the 4.3.4 server really have no business altering the code and expecting it to be accepted into the project. The Internet is a tool (just like your map argument), and that means anyone with half a brain can use that tool to figure out how easy SQL is understand. So, you code C++. Are you good enough that code you wrote has been added to the core? Or is that why you're so upset with anyone that says "if you can't set up your own server, you don't need to submit code"? Personally, I find Option 1 to be more appropriate. You may not like to have that said (over and over), but the main developers have enough going on that they don't need to have tons of patches that need MAJOR work for them to be useful in the core. A repack developer claims to be someone who is awesome in programming ability. They even claim to only do things the correct way, but I pointed out the incorrect operation of several things in their repack (most of which was something they added, too). The reason those same changes weren't added to Trinity is because they were so blatantly not correctly done. Community supported projects are not required to accept every submission. Those in control of the project have the right to reject anything they find undesirable. That contributor is free to fork the project and apply their own fixes, but not free to attack someone because they rejected your submission (for any reason).

Reading a map and driving are completely different concepts. I certainly wouldn't trust that driver on a trip, anyway. This project is NOT a matter of a trip around the block. The scale of this project is more like a cross country trip that uses back roads only. Nobody is going to hold their hand and type the code for them. If so, it's not their code but the other person's code.

So, what you're saying is that SQL is trickier than C++? I have to disagree. I may have to refresh my memory on certain syntax for SQL, but there are aspects of C++ that make me scratch my head (and a web search doesn't help clear it up). Can I program? You bet I can, but I'd written C applications that some people just "knew" were written in C++ because of how they operated. The point is, if they cannot type in very simple web searches to make sense of SQL error messages or even correct a syntax error, there is an extremely low chance that they would be capable of offering acceptable C++ code. That isn't to say those users are stupid, they are just not capable of being useful beyond trouble reports (aka issue tickets). Let's equate C++ to a jet (or commercial pilot) and SQL as a car (having a driver's license). If someone can only drive a car, would you want them flying a passenger jet? Not without a license, I bet. However, a licensed pilot would almost certainly be capable of driving a car, too. Would you really trust a pilot that couldn't drive a car?

Well, try this: shutdown worldserver (assuming it was running) recreate world DB with the world.sql (because having run worldserver will effect this next step) load sql client (i.e. HeidiSQL) and check the version table in the world DB check TC and TDB 434 commits and execute any updates since that revision relaunch worldserver

Referring to my world.sql? Which core are you running? What's the revision?

In theory, if they were capable of contributing to the project, they would also be able to take the guide (such as it is) and get a server running. In my opinion (possibly shared by many others), the inability to set up a working server is a fairly solid indication that contributions are unlikely to come from that individual. C++, even plain C, is much harder than running sql files in the appropriate order. Or, for that matter, following the steps in a guide for proper installation of support libraries, obtaining the core source, and compiling it.

Luckily, for the most part, that makes me qualified. Although, it sort of is a private server (for 2 players only) that I mess with. We shall really see if I "know what to do" after my current recompile (assuming the yellow ? is still missing from quest givers).

Ok, so it isn't an interaction problem. I misunderstood the problem you were describing, I guess. Anyway, I have noticed an issue with the new chat processing code. No GM commands show anything in the chat window, but the commands perform their action. Even a simple ".help" results in nothing being displayed. I hadn't even thought to try a normal "/say" or similar. Whispers may be broken, from what you're saying. All I can say is that code is being merged from the master branch that isn't 100% operational in the 4.3.4 branch. We may have to give these guys some time to iron out the issues.

That's likely why there have been requests for a TDB 434.06 that is more up to date. It may be easier to merely copy the appropriate updates to the TDB repository, so there's only 1 set of updates to apply. The world updates from 2 locations are where a lot of people seem to run into trouble. No interaction sounds like an unpatched client. Were you able to log out or did you have to terminate the client process? If you see something about being a possible cheater, that's a sure sign of the client needing to be patched. Also, there are a lot of currently unimplemented opcodes, so the ones you pasted are nothing new or game breaking. Certain functionality will be missing, though.

As simply put as I can list it: clone and compile latest core from branch 4.3.4 create the databases as listed in the guide, but do NOT apply auth and characters updates import the Alpha TDB 434.05 but do not start the servers yet copy the world updates from the TDB and TC 4.3.4 repositories to a common directory and merge them (to have them applied in, hopefully, correct order) assuming step 4 succeeded, you should now be clear to fire up authserver and worldserver I suggest the merging of the world updates before combining them is because certain tables have changed at times. In theory, the combined updates will work without errors. The auth and characters updates shouldn't be needed for new installs.

Looks like a bad world4 creation. Can you view world4 with something like HeidiSQL and verify those columns are in the command table? If you have been using another SQL program, that could be the source of error.

There's a huge amount of DB work to be done for both branches of Trinity. I believe there's more needed for 4.3.4, though. That's why there were some extras added for my world DB. In a private server for myself and my brother, I just haven't been motivated to get every minute detail ironed out. As for the loads of errors during worldserver startup, that seems to be normal for everyone. I was getting a lot of them before I started doing anything of my own. One of the fixes I did was correct spawns that had "spawndist" set to 0 while the "MoveType" was set to 1. Essentially, that's a conflict and resulted in a stationary NPC. So, I used UPDATE to give them a radius ("spawndist" > 0) to move within. What I don't know is if those creature templates were from Trinity or the one sql that spawned some empty zones. Of course, I'm of the opinion that we will never have a truly blizzlike server unless we obtain the genuine data from Blizzard. Same goes for the core. We'll get close, but it will never be perfect without having access to the real thing.

I could try it. I'm likely to get the same result, though. It will probably be a while (a day or so) before I can check, though. I recently noticed I needed to rerun the extractors. Everything seemed to be working fine, but the log was filling up with messages telling me to pay attention.

I'm glad it helped you.

Try "yum search ncurses" to see what it lists.

I seem to recall that I added someone's sql which populated a few empty zones. There's a bunch of mining nodes in Hyjal and Twilight Highlands that really shouldn't be there, but I forget what sql added them. I've added a couple vendor lists that were missing, some conditions for things that weren't added by anyone else, and even fixed up some of the fishing loot (defining some pools/areas that weren't already defined). For the most part, I tried to keep it blizzlike, but I don't have sniffs or an active retail account to compare everything. Also, most of the fixes that I've applied have been oriented for the Horde. Most of the sql patches I used are also on my pastebin (except the one that populated the empty zones), if you want to see the stuff I personally added (from memory or research).

Is your Internet service that slow?

From what I've seen, the Eternal-WoW client for 4.3.4 seems to be the closest to being complete. It seems to have things that the Monster-WoW client lacks, but I may be remembering wrong. All I can say for sure is that the extractors work perfectly with the Eternal-WoW version of the 4.3.4 client. Oddly, the Monster-WoW client for 4.3.4 seems to be complete enough to run as the game client for both Windows and Mac.

Well, I exported my current world DB, tossed the sql file in a zip, and uploaded that zip to http://www45.zippyshare.com/v/35820090/file.html NOTE: my world DB does contain custom weapons (ilvl 576) and additional content that did not come from Trinity (some from me, but more from other places)

Yeah, it's not a small amount of data. The world DB I have, exported to sql and turned into a ZIP file, is 18MB in size. If you mainly wanted it to see about making custom items, you can get the sql files I posted on my pastebin. In that form, it might be easier to play with your own item ideas. Assuming that you used the TDB 434.05 full release as your base, then you should be able to execute that 11.5MB file. You may find other sql files of interest on my pastebin, too.

Which core revision? Any patches?