Difference between revisions of "Deployment Methods"
Pickysaurus (talk | contribs) (Created page with "Coming soon Category: Vortex") |
Pickysaurus (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | |||
Coming soon | Coming soon | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <span style="display:none">Hardlink vs VFS | ||
+ | - There is no stable "commercial grade" vfs for free. | ||
+ | - The vfs I built for MO2 should work fine for the games and tools it has been tested with (since it has received a bunch of bugfixes from other devs now) but it is a common problem that a new tool wouldn't work until the vfs has been fixed to support it. | ||
+ | Considering Vortex supports >30 games plus their associated tools vs the 6 games MO2 supports (that all use the same engine) this would have been a maintenance nightmare. | ||
+ | - the MO2 usvfs can produce very hard to diagnose errors. | ||
+ | - usvfs is windows only whereas hard-links are supported on all platforms so it will be easier to port to Linux/MacOS | ||
+ | - usvfs will frequently trigger AV software | ||
+ | - usvfs causes a performance hit, hard links don't | ||
+ | There is probably a few other cons against the vfs - at least as the "primary" deployment method</span> | ||
[[Category: Vortex]] | [[Category: Vortex]] |
Revision as of 15:16, 12 October 2018
Coming soon