Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Shaders not cycling correctly #16181

Open
KimbaCPT opened this issue Jan 30, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #16196
Open

Shaders not cycling correctly #16181

KimbaCPT opened this issue Jan 30, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #16196

Comments

@KimbaCPT
Copy link

Description

When you start a game from command line with a shader included, cycling with N or M keys changes to retroarch/shaders folder, instead of the subfolder where the selected shader was. This doesn't happen if the shader is selected from Retroarch's menu.

Expected behavior

N and M keys should cycle between the rest of the shaders in the selected shader folder.

Actual behavior

N and M keys cycle to whatever shaders are in the retroarch/shaders folder instead.

Steps to reproduce the bug

  1. Start a game from command line, selecting a shader in the process.
  2. Try to cycle between shaders with the N and M keys.

Version/Commit

  • RetroArch: [1.16.0/14cb373]

Environment information

  • OS: Windows
zoltanvb added a commit to zoltanvb/RetroArch that referenced this issue Feb 3, 2024
If shader is given on command line, use it for directory init.
Fixes libretro#16181, shader cycle should now work using the dir of the
shader passed to CLI.
@zoltanvb zoltanvb linked a pull request Feb 4, 2024 that will close this issue
zoltanvb added a commit to zoltanvb/RetroArch that referenced this issue Feb 4, 2024
If shader is given on command line, use it for directory init.
Fixes libretro#16181, shader cycle should now work using the dir of the
shader passed to CLI.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant