stoppingby4now

I wonder how WB is scanning. Being that it's Python may have something to do with it since it's probably POSIX compliant. EDIT: I messed up. Remove the "/D" option and you will be good to go.

Sorry I missed this before - I get the 'sanitized' warning as soon as I open WB, no other action taken. Plus something is resetting plugins.txt to alphabetical order and I suspect it's related to this. I guess you've tried uninstalling/re-installing the mods? In the link to the WB thread where a guy was having the same trouble, he was only able to clear it up by re-installing WB, but clearing out all left over files before installing again. Hopefully you don't have to do that, but is there for a last resort. The only time I've seen my plugins.txt file get ordered alphabetically is if it was empty, then Skyrim Launcher would add mods in that order.

@jomelsontanco Symbolic links and junctions are different. First, a description of links and junctions. Symbolic Link - A file that contains a reference by name to the target directory or file. If you remove the target, the link remains, but no longer references anything. Restore the target and the link works again. Being it's own file, it also has it's own properties and does not reveal the properties of the target (file size, permissions, etc.). Since the reference is by name, symbolic links can point to any file that is accessible, local or remote. Hard Link - Essentially a label in a volume TOC that points to the first data block of a file that contains information about the target file (can only be created on files). This allows the hard link to look like the target file in every way, including its properties. Edit a hard link or the target, and both see the change, and this includes permissions as well. When a hard link is created, a link counter is incremented in the data portion of the file descriptor. This allows you to delete the target file (which decrements the link counter), and the hard link still looks like the original file. When using hard links, the file descriptor is only released by the filesystem when the link counter reaches 0 (target and all hard links have been removed). Hard links can only be used on the same volume and can not span to other volumes or remote shares. Junctions - This is a hybrid link, only usable on directories. On the surface they behave like a symbolic link, in that they can span volumes. In every other regard, they act like a hard link. This means you can create a junction from one volume to another, and you can also get the properties on the target directory like file size, permissions, etc. Although you can change permissions on the target and the junction will reflect it, due to its symbolic link nature, if you change the permissions on the junction, they are not reflected on the target. Junctions can only be used on the local system and can not span remote shares. Why are Junctions more dangerous and symbolic links safer? Directory Enumeration. Although junctions act like a symbolic link, due to the hard link nature of them, they are enumerated as directories. A symbolic link is a file, and will be enumerated as a file. Junctions can cause all sorts of odd behavior with Indexing Service, Backups, any program that needs to do file system searches, and anything that needs to enumerate directories. Especially when creating a loop as in the case above, you have a very serious problem waiting to explode. To get a handle on this visually, you can do the following: 1) Create a directory structure somewhere, I'll use e:\test\data as an example. 2) Create a Junction as e:\test\data\root that points to e:\test 3) Place some txt files wherever you want under e:\test 4) Do a search for .txt and Explorer will start repeating the list of txt files, continuously adding the 'root' directory to the end. Thanfully, Explorer will eventually give up. 5) Remove the junction and create a symbolic link instead e:\test\data\root -> e:\test 6) Do a search for .txt and Explorer will only return the txt files you created and stop. If you switched from XP to Vista, ever notice that some directories that were available in XP were not accessible but still there? Through their constant changing of the profile area for users, they created Junctions so that legacy programs could still reference files and directories in the users profile directory if they hard coded the path. They also changed the permissions on the Junction themselves to deny List Folder/Read Data access to everyone so that the directory could not be enumerated. Bottom line, symbolic links are much safer.

Junctions bad. Symbolic links good. In all seriousness, Junctions should be avoided. They can cause more problems than you think they solve. In regards to what you are trying to do, they can still be created manually (LSE is doing a good job of preventing a very large problem), but especially in this case symbolic links are loads safer (though can still cause some issues in certain scenarios). In this case, DO NOT USE A JUNCTION. You will get endless recursion. To make a soft link, you will need to run 'cmd' as administrator, then cd into your Skyrim\Data\ folder. Then just do the following: mklink /D root ..\..\Skyrim

I'm surprised I never got that page in a google search. What is interesting is that the only way the guy fixed his issue was re-installing WB and ensuring anything related to it's install that was left over was cleared out. Sounds like his WB got into some funky state, possibly something written to a dat file that was causing a clash.

I've never experienced mods being sanitized myself, and it's odd that I am having no luck in finding any information about what that really means either. At what point does it sanitize? Running BOSS? Installing a mod?

Oops, my bad. I hit the wrong link and was looking at Script Dragon.

At that position being completely still, I'm at 50, with a drop to 45 if looking around. In some outdoor areas with a lot of detail and waterfalls in the distance, I drop to 40. In either case, I didn't get any increase to FPS. I haven't tested scenes with a lot of particles like smoke though. He does have a version out for 1.4.27, but I have all my mods uninstalled at the moment so haven't tested it.

When I first found out about SkyBoost, a patch had been released making it useless, but I did try it out briefly before 1.4.21 came along. I don't know if it was because it was in Beta, but I didn't notice any boost to FPS at all. I'm curious if anyone tried that Beta and what their results were. Brief specs: Intel Core i5 2500K (4.0GHz overclock) Nvidia GTX580 1900x1200 resolution with Ultra settings I do have some tweaks applied to Skyrim, with probably the biggest ones affecting performance being increased shadow draw distance and uGridsToLoad set to 7.

I haven't found anything yet that stores information locally for mods on SW, but I'll do some more digging. I tend to agree that it would probably be in the cloud as well, and would most likely need some sort of API or steam commands to automate it. Or maybe some use of Auto Key as a last resort.

I just added a couple responses. Ended up having an idea that could possibly allow for blocking SW updates, but testing would need to be done.

I updated the description and added one more sentence. Thanks for the suggestion.

Skyrim Unplugged has been released on The Nexus and is available at the Skyrim Unplugged project page.Further information is available on the Description view. In short, Skyrim Unplugged allows you to enforce the Automatic Updates setting in Steam, allowing you to choose when you want to update Skyrim.