Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
> Sent: 18 October 2004 09:26
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Submodels
> On Monday 18 October 2004 00:24, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> > The ability to set a serviceability state for each submodel system would
> > seem to be the correct approach, but if I understand your proposal
> > correctly, it will end up in more files overall.
> Actually the systems and instrumentation configuration files are already
> CVS. So my point of view is that integrating the submodels configuration
> the already existing systems configuration file would result in fewer
> It seems to me that your point of view is that adding systems and
> instrumentation configuration files would result in more config files.
> of course is true, but as I said systems and instrumentation config is
> already there (and the won't go away ;-)).
OK, I've just updated cvs, and the inputs to some of my 3d instruments are
now broken in the Hunter, Seahawk and Spitfire. How do I get them back?
Flightgear-devel mailing list