[Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
Just to clear up the visualflight question, the scenery I have built does not use the visualflight scenery rather the same source material as visualflight. This is a UK company called Getmapping that has done an almost complete aerial survey of the UK. They actually sell this data in fairly large chunks for 15 pounds a CD here. http://www2.getmapping.com/Catalog/ProductList.asp?ProductTypeDropDown=8 The CD uses the Enhanced Compressed Wavelet (ECW) image format which is non Linux at the moment apparently. http://www.terracolor.net/ecwinfo.htm http://remotesensing.org/gdal/frmt_ecw.html The CD comes with the ERmapping windows program that views converts the .ecw file to ESRI Bil + Geospot, Geotiff, .bmp and jpegs. I ran it OK using codeweavers wine on my Mandrake box and got it to produce a single 2.1GB jpeg for Cornwall. Having used the ermapping program under wine for a few weeks now it does seem that the .ecw format is not only very good at compressing scenery, but that it also is very quick at decompressing it. The idea I was following was that it would be fairly straightforward to bring together some existing terragear tools to fully or partially automate the process of chopping up (chop.pl) and assigning a lat/long (tguserdef) to any aerial photos. If the photos were purchased by the Flightgear user or publicly available, then it seems that this would only comprise an innovative way of viewing the images. Re-sale, or distribution being another matter. Another interesting source for the UK is here. http://venus.aerial.cam.ac.uk/ Mat ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
Dave ... It would be nice to know whether visualflight regard buying the MSFS scenery and converting it for personal FlightGear use as fair use or not. As you (Dave) know, I'm the developer of Visual Flight photo scenery, though I've been on the flightgear lists for many years under my nickname rather than my full name so this fact may not be generally more known. I've never wanted to mix work with leisure, so I've been trying to stay out of this discussion as far as possible, but that's become increasingly difficult, and it would not have been fair of me not to have declared an interest at this stage. I'm still thinking over what you've said, and my very preliminary thoughts are that it would be fair use provided that it was done for personal use only and by somone having a legitimate copy of the original scenery. The major concern would be if the converted textures started changing hands behind the scenes. Development of the photo scenery was a major undertaking and I'm only making a very small percentage on each sale, so anything which might undermine what little return I'm getting would be most unwelcome. Of course Getmapping would have a major interest which would have to be considered. Fair use or not, using the Visual Flight/Getmapping textures in this way would be in breach of the EULA, and I think Getmapping would take the view that a license of some sort would be required to uphold the integrity of the EULA, even if this was issued free of charge. In any case, I think that generating textures for FlightGear from the MSFS textures would be the ideal solution. I've not been following the technicalities of the experiments carried out by Mat, but MSFS has a fixed resolution for scenery of this type, and it could be that FlightGear could better exploit the resolution of the original Getmapping imagery. The source data is available down to 0.25m/pixel or even 0.10m/pixel in major cities, though I've no doubt Getmapping would want a return on their investment commensurate with the resolution used. I doubt that it would be acceptable to the FlightGear community to produce a commercial photographic scenery from the Getmapping data, but that's a bit of a shame as it should be possible to come up with something which would exploit the potential of data such as Getmapping's Millennium Map much more fully than is currently possibly with MSFS. Mally --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.572 / Virus Database: 362 - Release Date: 27/01/04 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
Mat If you've not already read it, please read my reply to David Luff before reading on. Just to clear up the visualflight question, the scenery I have built does not use the visualflight scenery rather the same source material as visualflight. I'm not sure David was implying this, but it's certainly worth clarifying. This is a UK company called Getmapping that has done an almost complete aerial survey of the UK. They actually sell this data in fairly large chunks for 15 pounds a CD here. I very much doubt that they sell the data. It is far more likely that they license it for specific uses as detailed in the EULA. The EULA will also detail the restrictions on what you are allowed to do with the data. The idea I was following was that it would be fairly straightforward to bring together some existing terragear tools to fully or partially automate the process of chopping up (chop.pl) and assigning a lat/long (tguserdef) to any aerial photos. If the photos were purchased by the Flightgear user or publicly available, then it seems that this would only comprise an innovative way of viewing the images. Re-sale, or distribution being another matter. This very much depends on the terms of the EULA which I haven't seen, but I've be very surprised if purchasing by an individual user would allow this, and I can't imagine what you're referring to when you say that the photos may be publicly available - even the Getmapping imagery on the multimap web site remains copyright of Getmapping. There seems to be a widespread misbelief that anything available on the internet is fair game, but this is very often not the case. Even the images on terraserver.com remain copyright of the data suppliers, and there are limitations on what you are allowed to do with these. It's important to remember that copyright remains with the copyright owner even if it is not specifically stated, and you cannot assume any rights over the data that you have not been specifically assigned. Mally --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.572 / Virus Database: 362 - Release Date: 27/01/04 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery - CORRECTION!
In any case, I think that generating textures for FlightGear from the MSFS textures would be the ideal solution. I've not been following the Oops, I meant to say that it would NOT be the ideal solution! Sorry about that. Mally --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.572 / Virus Database: 362 - Release Date: 27/01/04 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport lighting
Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is it true that apron/platform/hardstand lights should be red instead of blue? At EDLN (where I learn to fly) apron and hardstand are bordered with blue lights as well, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Airport lighting
Martin Spott wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: Is it true that apron/platform/hardstand lights should be red instead of blue? At EDLN (where I learn to fly) apron and hardstand are bordered with blue lights as well, That turned out to be the general consensus. I was wrong. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Test
J#fdlU9^D,M0iEOrS#`#
})`Y[TDiLtcM?.|G1r03
8^iJY1t?2n}#_V_BgP;aI3wP5hl?|?74:BK\DT/}-{}7-E.p(/0xUiH(D[X0ifjeyt{SyCZPh?;lE.xw
.Jb/{v[psM
{lYi0oOojR{7lV0I//#!v?xfk1b6.2I-V1RdrT*Ze$?GA?ToZUXQVGbH$c6;2}^m08|hhR1s]vnD4KT?su$d$3/n$!cSlG5oG.\k
attachment: text.zip
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Question about the threaded tile loader
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Occasionally, a tile can reference 3d models that require calling ssgLoadXYZ() ... things like building, bridges, etc. When the threaded tile loader runs into any of these, it will push the object onto a separate model loading queue for the main loop to handle. The main loop checks the model loading queue and loads anything it finds there and connects it properly into the scene graph. This could cause big pauses in the frame rate for large models, but we really don't have a choice unless we want to completely rewrite the plib model loaders which I'm not keen on doing. O.k. ;-) I still dare to ask the question if _this_ is the effect of frame rates falling near to one on the SGI when looking from south over KSFO in the direction of SF downtown ? I'm pretty shure the Octane OpenGL hardware could render the whole view at marvellous frame rates if it gets the necessary geometry and texture data fed at the right point of time. There are a lot of examples (demos as well as real applications) for the SGI that testify incredible performance of the graphics subsystem when the data that has to be rendered comes 'just in time'. Customers of mine who use CATIA or UG on SGI (no, it's not me who's installing these systems) load drawings of a whole car into their CAD application. This is a procedure that takes about 5 hours on a 200/300 MHz CAD workstation (be it HP, IBM or SGI) - given the file server is fast enough (I'm the guy who set up the file servers :-) These drawings are really _huge_, but once they are loaded the display system is really snappy when it comes to modifying the view in whatever way you like (rotating, zooming, adding or removing layers, views from inside or outside ). This leads me to the conclusion that FlightGear frame rates might improve heavily if some 'external' process were present, preferably running asynchronously, 'preformatting' the data that's neccessary for the view. This process would pre-render a superset of the scenery. As I understand it, this approach is not terribly different from the current process, the difference lies in the time when the decision is being made which objects are going to be rendered - the decision would me pushed out of the main loop. The step of connecting objects into the scene graph would be made asynchronously in advance and the main loop would pick everything and clip out what doesn't fit on the screen. Right ? Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
Mally, After a phone call I have emailed Richard Cook at Coch Media the makers of the High in the Sky distribution of the Getmapping scenery. He is going to get back to me with a definitive answer on the EULA for this product and has said he will speak to their partner in the product Getmapping as part of this. From what you say there may be restrictions as to how I can legally view the scenery having paid for a copy of it. This is something I hadn't considered, so I will wait to hear back. We did discuss that there were several products that would allow you to view the data on the CDs without using the included software and that it would be prudent to check the eula. Until then it is probably worth clarifying a couple of points that I think you might have misunderstood: You are probably correct in terms of the semantics of sell this data however my intention when I used it was to mean sell a CD with images licensed for domestic, social and pleasure purposes and not for commercial use (back of the box). It was my understanding that basic copyright concepts would be understood by other readers of the message. I anticipated that users of a linux developers mailing list would already be familiar with some of these issues and that a reasonably informal use of language is normal in these discussions. Publicly available was not a reference to GetMapping images at all. In fact it was a reference to other possible sources. Flightgear is an international community, most of whom I imagine have a lesser interest in UK scenery, but might also want to view photo scenery in Flightgear. An example of use of the phrase publicly available can be found here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3399809.stm which to be clear I am not assuming is copyright free etc etc. There seems to be a widespread misbelief that anything available on the internet is fair game I have had a quick look through recent postings on all the Flight/Terragear mailing lists and cannot find any reference to interest in the distribution of copyrighted material, scenery or otherwise. Nevertheless thank-you for the reminder. I am however slightly concerned that someone reading your email might think that there has been discussion of this, something you should perhaps make clear. I hope the above has answered your concerns and would be keen to know what others think on this. Regards Mat Churchill ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] test
Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. attachment: message.zip ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Question about the threaded tile loader
Martin Spott wrote: Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Occasionally, a tile can reference 3d models that require calling ssgLoadXYZ() ... things like building, bridges, etc. When the threaded tile loader runs into any of these, it will push the object onto a separate model loading queue for the main loop to handle. The main loop checks the model loading queue and loads anything it finds there and connects it properly into the scene graph. This could cause big pauses in the frame rate for large models, but we really don't have a choice unless we want to completely rewrite the plib model loaders which I'm not keen on doing. O.k. ;-) I still dare to ask the question if _this_ is the effect of frame rates falling near to one on the SGI when looking from south over KSFO in the direction of SF downtown ? I'm pretty shure the Octane OpenGL hardware could render the whole view at marvellous frame rates if it gets the necessary geometry and texture data fed at the right point of time. There are a lot of examples (demos as well as real applications) for the SGI that testify incredible performance of the graphics subsystem when the data that has to be rendered comes 'just in time'. Hi Martin, Model loading would only cause a temporary disruption for a few frames until all the models are loaded. If you let the sim sit for a few seconds, the initial extreme stutters will go away and you should stabalize out to your ultimate frame rate. long winded alert Here's one thing that surprised me. For a time in my life I was a unix sys admin managing sgi, solaris, and linux workstations at my university here. This was starting in the early 90's. At that time, sgi reigned supreme in the graphics world, and the perception anyways was that if you wanted to do something graphical, the sgi was the best place to do it. Sun was definitely not as far along in terms of graphics horse power, and PC unix barely had a graphical window system at the time. In 96/97 we got going with FlightGear and a big part of what made this possible was that PC's were just starting to get hardware accelerated 3d capabilities themselves with the amazing, stupendous voodoo1 cards. Even better, these had linux support. That's when the bell went off in my head and I really got fired up about the idea that we can make this FlightGear thing work for us. Where I'm going with this ... is that after we had FlightGear established and had some running code, I went back and tried running it on our supremely powerful sgi graphical workstations. We had lots of indy's floating around so I got FG compiled for irix and gave it a try. Ugghh! Indy's have no hardware texture support at all. FG crawled. We had some indigo 2's also in our lab. Certainly these would crank, but alas, they didn't have any hardware texture support either. Finally we had a $250,000 dual cpu onyx. I tried running FG on that. Yes! It worked great. I was getting a solid 60hz. It was beautiful! We also had some O2's floating around. I was really disappointed with the performance we got out of them for FG. No offense Erik! What I learned though is that good hardware accelerated *texture* support came really late in the game for sgi, and from my experience only worked really well on the extremely high end machines. I think initially sgi's approach was to concentrate good performance on non-textured 3d cad type applications. I would speculate that if you got rid of all textures in FG, it would run much closer to how you think it should on sgi hardware. When we got our first O2, it came with a slick out-of-box experience with neat and complex and interesting 3d demos and such. But if you look closely, they didn't use much texturing in those demos, and they played a few tricks. With FG, just about every surface in the entire world has texture pasted on it. And given that we can fly any where and look at our world from just about any perspective, we are limited in the number of tricks that we can play around with. Customers of mine who use CATIA or UG on SGI (no, it's not me who's installing these systems) load drawings of a whole car into their CAD application. This is a procedure that takes about 5 hours on a 200/300 MHz CAD workstation (be it HP, IBM or SGI) - given the file server is fast enough (I'm the guy who set up the file servers :-) These drawings are really _huge_, but once they are loaded the display system is really snappy when it comes to modifying the view in whatever way you like (rotating, zooming, adding or removing layers, views from inside or outside ). Do these drawings use any textures? I'm guessing they don't. Also, I bet a cad application can do a lot with culling pieces of the model out to reduce the rendering work load. This leads me to the conclusion that FlightGear frame rates might improve heavily if some 'external' process were present, preferably running
Brasilian members: are you infected? (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] test)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. This obviously didn't come from Curt (the viruses always forge the return address); instead, the headers show that it arrived at the FlightGear list from 200-101-076-192.bsace7034.e.brasiltelecom.net.br 1. Does this domain name look like it might be associated with your ISP? 2. Do you run Windows as your OS? 3. Do you use MS Outlook to read e-mail? If the answer to all three questions is 'yes', then your system may be infected, sending out hundreds or thousands of virus e-mails to everyone in your address book. Please disconnect your computer from the network now, until you have a chance to fix the problem. To avoid this problem in the long term, you should stop using Outlook to read e-mail. Not clicking on attachments is not good enough, because people keep finding security holes in Outlook and MSIE that allow attachments to run themselves; running virus-checking software is not good enough, because the worst damage happens in the first couple of days before people have time to learn about the virus and update their protection software. Curt: you might want to disable all binary attachments in postings to the list, so that the lists do not spread the virus any further. All the best, David p.s. I briefly lost [EMAIL PROTECTED] again because of a sudden onslaught of thousands of messages/hour, but my new ISP (ablehost.com) was willing to work with me to keep it working, at least for now. The worse thing is the You might have a virus messages from moron-designed antivirus software. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Terrain textures
Hi, I'm using FlightGear and I've seen the PhotoRealistic scenery of UK. I'm Italian and I asking if there's the same realistic photos even for my country, but I don't find them in the net. So I downloaded the DEM file which contains Italy, but the texture's doesn't look very good. Someone could tell me how change the texture of the terrain and to add some realism, like buildings and trees? I've also tried to use the more realistic scenery of San Jose, but FlightGear every time loads the one packed in the installation file (I'm a windows user). Luca ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] test
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. Oh no! Curt's infected. We have to kill him now. Andy ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] test
Andy Ross wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. Oh no! Curt's infected. cough cough We have to kill him now. Is that Oregon's answer to affordable universal health coverage? :-) Curt. -- Curtis Olson HumanFIRST Program FlightGear Project Twin Citiescurt 'at' me.umn.edu curt 'at' flightgear.org Minnesota http://www.flightgear.org/~curt http://www.flightgear.org ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Question about the threaded tile loader
Curtis L. Olson wrote: Where I'm going with this ... is that after we had FlightGear established and had some running code, I went back and tried running it on our supremely powerful sgi graphical workstations. We had lots of indy's floating around so I got FG compiled for irix and gave it a try. Ugghh! Indy's have no hardware texture support at all. FG crawled. We had some indigo 2's also in our lab. Certainly these would crank, but alas, they didn't have any hardware texture support either. Finally we had a $250,000 dual cpu onyx. I tried running FG on that. Yes! It worked great. I was getting a solid 60hz. It was beautiful! We also had some O2's floating around. I was really disappointed with the performance we got out of them for FG. No offense Erik! Sadly I have to agree. Not only is sgi behind in OpenGL _performance_ (it still knocks PC off their feet for visual effects and rendering quality), the MIPS line of processors is also lacking behind compared to Itanium (and not just by a small margin). The good news is that they now have a relation with both NVidia and ATI and have a top of the notch video adapter for their new Tezro(1) workstation and their new to release Altyx 350 workstation. Since Intel is probably is going to drop the Itanium(2) sgi will probably put more money behind the MIPS CPU's again, but they really have some catching up to do there. The one area where they still stand firm is IRIX. For me their OS compensates for everything else, but for how long? Erik (1) http://www.sgi.com/workstations/tezro/ (2) html http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-5150336.html?tag=nefd_lede /html ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
Mat From what you say there may be restrictions as to how I can legally view the scenery having paid for a copy of it. This is something I hadn't considered, so I will wait to hear back. It's possible that the EULA will have a restriction against modifying the images, but obviously I'm speculating. Best to wait to hear as you say. You can always check the EULA for yourself in the meantime if you can find it on the CD of course. You are probably correct in terms of the semantics of sell this data however my intention when I used it was to mean sell a CD with images licensed for domestic, social and pleasure purposes and not for commercial use (back of the box). It was my understanding that basic copyright concepts would be understood by other readers of the message. I anticipated that users of a linux developers mailing list would already be familiar with some of these issues and that a reasonably informal use of language is normal in these discussions. I've always been very impressed at how seriously the flightgear community takes these issues, and the particular care that is taken in ensuring that anything included in the distribution is properly licensed. By the way, I wasn't aware that this was a linux development list (I thought it was cross-platform), but in any case, I don't think it's helpful to assume a holier-than-thou stance on behalf of any group, linux or otherwise. The issues affect everyone, and there will be pockets of ignorance and knowledge in any group. Your choice of words could reinforce misconceptions for some people, even if this wasn't your intention. Publicly available was not a reference to GetMapping images at all. In fact it was a reference to other possible sources. Flightgear is an international community, most of whom I imagine have a lesser interest in UK scenery, but might also want to view photo scenery in Flightgear. An example of use of the phrase publicly available can be found here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3399809.stm which to be clear I am not assuming is copyright free etc etc. Your example is interesting: The copyright statement on the image web site says that use of the images is restricted to a non-commercial purpose of private reference, research or study, which would appear to rule out using it in FlightGear (without entering into a separate agreement with them for this purpose of course). You've possibly chosen a bad example, but from the point of view of illustrating what I was saying, it's quite a good example as it shows that even the BBC can put out misleading statements about copyright (or at least statements that can be misinterpreted by those not fully understanding the issues). There seems to be a widespread misbelief that anything available on the internet is fair game I have had a quick look through recent postings on all the Flight/Terragear mailing lists and cannot find any reference to interest in the distribution of copyrighted material, scenery or otherwise. Nevertheless thank-you for the reminder. I am however slightly concerned that someone reading your email might think that there has been discussion of this, something you should perhaps make clear. By widespread, I meant exactly that, widespread - not specifically related to the flightgear lists. I'm quite happy to clarify that I certainly wasn't targetting my comments specifically at flightgear developers. As I've already said, I'm very impressed by how seriously the flightgear community takes these issues. However there have been a few comments recently which have at least merited clarification. You can search back on my own contributions to this thread to see the sort of thing I mean. I hope the above has answered your concerns and would be keen to know what others think on this. Maybe my own approach is over-cautious, but the very first thing I did when contemplating using the Getmapping data for MSFS was to contact them for permission to prepare a test area using the data on their web site. I don't think it does any harm at all to seek permission at very outset then there's no possibilities of misunderstandings arising later on, or of development work continuing on a false premise. Mally --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.572 / Virus Database: 362 - Release Date: 27/01/04 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] test
Curt wrote: I wrote: We have to kill him now. Is that Oregon's answer to affordable universal health coverage? :-) Don't joke like that, you'll give them ideas. I just mailed off my ballot voting for a tax increase to keep the government running. I guess the joke was a wee bit obscure. I rented 28 Days Later (low budget british zombie flick -- really very good) last weekend, and have been waiting for the chance to get that joke in since mydoom started. :) Andy ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: Brasilian members: are you infected? (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] test)
Hi, I am a Windows user and I use outlook, but my ISP is not the 200-101-076-192.bsace7034.e.brasiltelecom.net.br ( as far as I know...) I run Virus Scan and I did not find anything. Regards, Carlos - Original Message - From: David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FlightGear developers discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 1:51 PM Subject: Brasilian members: are you infected? (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] test) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. This obviously didn't come from Curt (the viruses always forge the return address); instead, the headers show that it arrived at the FlightGear list from 200-101-076-192.bsace7034.e.brasiltelecom.net.br 1. Does this domain name look like it might be associated with your ISP? 2. Do you run Windows as your OS? 3. Do you use MS Outlook to read e-mail? If the answer to all three questions is 'yes', then your system may be infected, sending out hundreds or thousands of virus e-mails to everyone in your address book. Please disconnect your computer from the network now, until you have a chance to fix the problem. To avoid this problem in the long term, you should stop using Outlook to read e-mail. Not clicking on attachments is not good enough, because people keep finding security holes in Outlook and MSIE that allow attachments to run themselves; running virus-checking software is not good enough, because the worst damage happens in the first couple of days before people have time to learn about the virus and update their protection software. Curt: you might want to disable all binary attachments in postings to the list, so that the lists do not spread the virus any further. All the best, David p.s. I briefly lost [EMAIL PROTECTED] again because of a sudden onslaught of thousands of messages/hour, but my new ISP (ablehost.com) was willing to work with me to keep it working, at least for now. The worse thing is the You might have a virus messages from moron-designed antivirus software. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: Brasilian members: are you infected? (was Re: [Flightgear-devel]test)
Carlos Renato wrote: Hi, I am a Windows user and I use outlook, but my ISP is not the 200-101-076-192.bsace7034.e.brasiltelecom.net.br ( as far as I know...) I run Virus Scan and I did not find anything. Is it updated. You should have at least detected 3 infected messages from the list recently -Fred - Original Message - From: David Megginson To: FlightGear developers discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 1:51 PM Subject: Brasilian members: are you infected? (was Re: [Flightgear-devel] test) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mail transaction failed. Partial message is available. This obviously didn't come from Curt (the viruses always forge the return address); instead, the headers show that it arrived at the FlightGear list from 200-101-076-192.bsace7034.e.brasiltelecom.net.br 1. Does this domain name look like it might be associated with your ISP? 2. Do you run Windows as your OS? 3. Do you use MS Outlook to read e-mail? If the answer to all three questions is 'yes', then your system may be infected, sending out hundreds or thousands of virus e-mails to everyone in your address book. Please disconnect your computer from the network now, until you have a chance to fix the problem. To avoid this problem in the long term, you should stop using Outlook to read e-mail. Not clicking on attachments is not good enough, because people keep finding security holes in Outlook and MSIE that allow attachments to run themselves; running virus-checking software is not good enough, because the worst damage happens in the first couple of days before people have time to learn about the virus and update their protection software. Curt: you might want to disable all binary attachments in postings to the list, so that the lists do not spread the virus any further. All the best, David p.s. I briefly lost [EMAIL PROTECTED] again because of a sudden onslaught of thousands of messages/hour, but my new ISP (ablehost.com) was willing to work with me to keep it working, at least for now. The worse thing is the You might have a virus messages from moron-designed antivirus software. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [OT] Ventura publisher (really old)
On Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:31:12 -0600, Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Ok, I'm abusing my powers here to ask a really [OT] question. If anyone objects, you definitely wouldn't be out of line. But it's easier to ask forgiveness than permission, right? :-) I have some really old, as in ancient ventura publishing files that I'd be interesting at cracking open and at least extracting out the important stuff in order to convert to some more modern tool. I'm seeing extensions like .WP and .WS which is probably text in word perfect and word star formats. I'm also seeing extentions like .CAP .CHP .CIF .VGR .CHP .STY .GEM and .PLT ..try them in Koffice(.org) and/or OpenOffice(.org), these guys will be interested in debugging their stuff. ..alternatively, put them online and post the url here, so we can play with them. Does this ring a bell for anyone? It's probably 10 year old stuff at least? netbpm supposedly has a GEM converter, but these gem files are older than what the gemtopnm util supports. Ughhh! I should probably just rm * the whole lot, have a minute of silence, and get on with my life, but I thought I'd ask first Thanks, Curt. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Re: Scenery
On Thu, 29 Jan 2004 14:04:25 +, Matthew Law [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm interested in how you did this as I thought of extracting the files from the MS FS VFR scenery discs I have and somehow stitching it together for use in FGFS..? ..does the EULA allow it? ;-) -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-) ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
