* Dave Culp -- Wednesday 20 April 2005 05:25:
> I'm running today's CVS FlightGear on a linux box. When flying a JSBSim
> aircraft and hitting the F3 key to get a screen capture the aircraft goes out
> of control (looks like a spin, from the external view). The screen capture
> works fine oth
On Tuesday 19 April 2005 22:52, Paul Surgeon wrote:
> On Tuesday, 19 April 2005 08:21, eagle monart wrote:
> > i tried to used fgsd but terrains are made in triangles not in squares
> > an it looks impossible to tile what you want . a
>
> It's impossible to tile textures properly in FG.
> FG uses
> I'm running today's CVS FlightGear on a linux box. When flying a JSBSim
> aircraft and hitting the F3 key to get a screen capture the aircraft goes
> out of control (looks like a spin, from the external view). The screen
> capture works fine otherwise.
Same thing with Yasim (the A-10).
Da
I'm running today's CVS FlightGear on a linux box. When flying a JSBSim
aircraft and hitting the F3 key to get a screen capture the aircraft goes out
of control (looks like a spin, from the external view). The screen capture
works fine otherwise.
Anyone else getting this?
Dave
___
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..ok ;o), did your server do any of the build work, or "just" control
the build and collect the built tiles?
..I have 3 AMD Duron sitting here, one 1.3 and 2 1.2's, all IDE, and
clientele hardware, and my own junk, a noisy old 2x550 P3 with swap
on 5 9G SCSI's, plus some IDE sp
On Wed, 20 Apr 2005 01:28:03 +0100, Lee wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Tuesday 19 April 2005 02:23, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> > ..so, I wanna know what kinky things I can get done in a 4
> > hour run on a 320,000 BogoMips rig with 25.6GB ram, 2 TB of
> > swap an/or /tmp disk space, on
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:24:18 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> >..ah. Server disk OI I can shot down doing everything on a 25 GB
> >ramdisk, but that too takes network bandwidth. Question is how much
> >do I need of each.
> >
> >..and you forgot t
On April 19, 2005 09:24 pm, Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> I can't afford a lot of scsi ...
Have you tried getting these off E-Bay?
Ampere
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:52:50 +0100, Jon wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Paul Surgeon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 19 April 2005 08:21, eagle monart wrote:
> >
> >>i tried to used fgsd but terrains are made in triangles not in
> >squares an >it looks impossible to tile what you want . a
> >
>
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 22:45:49 +0100, Jon wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Curtis L. Olson wrote:
> > Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> >
> >> ..Curt, I need an idea of how much cpu work, building the scenery,
> >is. > What kinda machine(s) did you use, and how long did it take
> >to build > the scen
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..ah. Server disk OI I can shot down doing everything on a 25 GB
ramdisk, but that too takes network bandwidth. Question is how much
do I need of each.
..and you forgot to tell me what kinda machines you used, so I assumed
you used 2 of "my" Celeron 850's. ;o)
I forget
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 14:47:18 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt,
>
> You should be aware that scenery building is much more of a data
> shuffling job, and much less of a cpu intensive job. The big
> bottlenecks will be your network bandwidth and server disk IO.
..ah.
Vivian Meazza wrote:
> It won't compile under Cygwin using gcc either. Fails with:
>
> NasalSys.cxx:292: error: invalid conversion from `naRef (*)(Context*, naRef,
>int, naRef*)' to `naRef (*)(Context*, naRef)'
You forgot to update your SimGear, or have an old one still
installed somewhere. T
On Tuesday 19 April 2005 02:23, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> ..so, I wanna know what kinky things I can get done in a 4
> hour run on a 320,000 BogoMips rig with 25.6GB ram, 2 TB of
> swap an/or /tmp disk space, on "a 170GHz Celeron" openmosix
> type single image cluster. ;o)
Distributed 3d rendering:)
Thermals work again in CVS FlightGear.
Dave
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Paul Surgeon wrote:
On Tuesday, 19 April 2005 08:21, eagle monart wrote:
i tried to used fgsd but terrains are made in triangles not in squares an
it looks impossible to tile what you want . a
It's impossible to tile textures properly in FG.
FG uses an irregular triangle mesh and not square tiles
Andy Ross wrote:
>
> Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> > 2. MSVC use file extensions to choose the right language to
> > compile. So in misc.c the syntax of C not C++ apply. This file
> > should definitively be named misc.cxx, like lib.c should be lib.cxx.
>
> Definitely not. I promise you that it's a
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..Curt, I need an idea of how much cpu work, building the scenery, is.
What kinda machine(s) did you use, and how long did it take to build
the scenery?
I haven't timed the latest builds real close, but figure if you throw a
couple machines at it in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Frederic Bouvier schrieb:
> simgear\nasal\string.c(200) : warning C4244: 'function' : conversion
> from 'double' to 'int', possible loss of data
> simgear\nasal\string.c(261) : warning C4244: 'function' : conversion
> from 'double' to 'int', possible l
Andy Ross wrote :
Erik Hofman wrote:
It's quite simple, SGI has the zero warning compiling philosophy; No
build will be shipped if it generates a warning. It has gained them
the reputation of being one of the most stable UNIX variants
available.
Now I'm even more confused. What warning are
On Tuesday, 19 April 2005 08:21, eagle monart wrote:
> i tried to used fgsd but terrains are made in triangles not in squares an
> it looks impossible to tile what you want . a
It's impossible to tile textures properly in FG.
FG uses an irregular triangle mesh and not square tiles like MSFS.
Even
Erik Hofman wrote:
> It's quite simple, SGI has the zero warning compiling philosophy; No
> build will be shipped if it generates a warning. It has gained them
> the reputation of being one of the most stable UNIX variants
> available.
Now I'm even more confused. What warning are you talking abou
Andy Ross wrote:
I don't follow the logic. If that were the true, then the only
"valid" result of running a C compiler would be a pre-struct K&R
thing, no? :)
You don't bother to turn on a switch to enable structs or function
prototypes, you just expect them to be there. Similarly you didn't
need
For what this is worth:
For work, I build flightgear with some custom mods using 2003
.NET
It builds with pretty much zero code changes.
I do have to munge around with the project files and add a bunch of
include paths, lib paths, lib refs, etc. to get a clean
build.
However, the intere
Arnt,
You should be aware that scenery building is much more of a data
shuffling job, and much less of a cpu intensive job. The big
bottlenecks will be your network bandwidth and server disk IO.
Curt.
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:20:13 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTE
Erik Hofman wrote:
> It is, in fact MIPSpro supported c99 before gcc did, but you need a
> compiler option to enable it which is the only valid way to enable
> it. Just face it, gcc behaved bad (again).
I don't follow the logic. If that were the true, then the only
"valid" result of running a C
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 13:20:13 -0500, Curtis wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Arnt Karlsen wrote:
>
> >..Curt, I need an idea of how much cpu work, building the scenery,
> >is. What kinda machine(s) did you use, and how long did it take to
> >build the scenery?
> >
> >
>
> I haven't ti
Andy Ross wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote:
The same problem happened for MIPSpro.
Sigh. I guess six years isn't enough for SGI and Microsoft. Has
anyone had a chance to try the Sun compiler, which (I think) is
the only other one we use.
It is, in fact MIPSpro supported c99 before gcc did, but you need
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..Curt, I need an idea of how much cpu work, building the scenery, is.
What kinda machine(s) did you use, and how long did it take to build
the scenery?
I haven't timed the latest builds real close, but figure if you throw a
couple machines at it in parallel, it's going to
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 08:00:28 -0400, Josh wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Sorry, no help from me, but this does remind me of something I was
> thinking about. I had the pleasure of stopping by Niagra Falls this
> weekend, and it occured to me that the ability to incorporate
> handmade me
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 10:37:20 +0100, Jon wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Curtis L. Olson wrote:
>
> > Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> >
> > How you going to keep that beast cool? If you put all those
> > machines in a single room and turned them on, they'd probably melt
> > through the earth's c
Selon Terry Reinert:
> I am still using VC++ 6.0 from 98 myself. I have been thinking of
> upgrading to either 2003 or 2005 but hesitant to do so until I find out
> whether I can still code the same way as I do now in those environments.
> I did some reading on the MS website last night and it see
I am still using VC++ 6.0 from 98 myself. I have been thinking of
upgrading to either 2003 or 2005 but hesitant to do so until I find out
whether I can still code the same way as I do now in those
environments. I did some reading on the MS website last night and it
seemed to imply that I do not
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
I am not here to endorse Microsoft choices, but I see little point to use C
syntax when C++ is available and is the language of choice for the overall
FlightGear project. However, the link below should clarify Microsoft point of
view :
http://www.dotnet247.com/247reference/m
Selon Andy Ross:
> Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> > I found where it is not C : you don't always declare local
> > variables at the beginning of functions but you have the C++
> > habit to declare them as you need them.
>
> ... which is a well-established feature of the (now 6-year-old!)
> C99 standard
Andy Ross wrote:
> Sigh. I guess six years isn't enough for SGI and Microsoft. Has
> anyone had a chance to try the Sun compiler, which (I think) is
> the only other one we use.
I use GCC-3.4.2 on Sun because I didn't manage to get a different one,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's j
This is now in cvs. There are the following components:
Menu: Help/Basic keys(zooming, view cycling, etc.)
Help/Common Aircraft Keys (brakes, flaps, autopilot)
Help/Aircraft Help (aircraft specific keys, performance data,
procedure
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> I found where it is not C : you don't always declare local
> variables at the beginning of functions but you have the C++
> habit to declare them as you need them.
... which is a well-established feature of the (now 6-year-old!)
C99 standard. It's not a "C++" thing. And
Josh Babcock wrote:
> [...], but I think it would be really neat to just have a database of
> these places that would get automatically included whenever Curt builds the
> scenery.
This idea, as fine as it is, is not new to the list.
The most hindering fact is that there - AFAIK - is no Open
im
Frederic Bouvier schreef:
OK, I backed out all my changes and restart the compilation. I found where it is
not C : you don't always declare local variables at the beginning of functions
but you have the C++ habit to declare them as you need them. So the change
below are needed and they are much sim
eagle monart wrote:
hi
i am trying to build more realistic terrain. when i am searching i
found some info about that on
http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-users/2004-March/007485.html
. also i read tutorials about scenery generation in fgsd.
my question is which way do i have t
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
On Sun, 17 Apr 2005 17:06:11 -0400, Chris wrote in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
So I guess you'll be working on getting a GPL'd, general-use option
available.
..not yet, I'm scheeming a renderfarm stunt; some new 2'nd hand HW shop
here says they go
42 matches
Mail list logo
