Re: [Flightgear-devel] create craters and smoke effect
Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 13:13:20 +0200, Boris wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Maybe that saves some time or at least keeps you from re-inventing the wheel ;-) ..maybe. Executive summary from http://www.phoenixosfs.org/ ;-) BTW, interesting project but they don't seem to have written much code yet, rather they seem to be considering using FlightGear itself as backend for their combat simulator...on the other hand their project might also be of interest to the original poster exactly because of that ! And it was getting fun again: Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Donec molestie. Sed aliquam sem ut arcu. Phasellus sollicitudin. Vestibulum condimentum facilisis nulla. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Nulla nonummy. Cras quis libero. Cras venenatis. Aliquam posuere lobortis pede. Nullam fringilla urna id leo. Praesent aliquet pretium erat. Praesent non odio. ..please weed out the dead stuff on posting, Well, I *did* mention that I was merely looking for other projects which already make use of the features that were requested, I mentioned primarily bzflag - cause it is based on SimGear and all the other projects were just hits whose descriptions sound as if they might be useful if bzflag's sources alone should not be sufficient. Also, I did make clear that some of these don't seem to be under active development, amongst them a couple of projects which have concept docs anyway, and that (= ideas) was it what the original poster asked for. or if you find anything useable in the dead projects cvs trees, point us to the good stuff. I did not browse any CVS repositories, nor do I intend to do so now - *if* there's interest in any of these project at all, that's certainly rather a job for those who want to do the coding for that specific project/feature addon. Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: how to handle add-on ground scenery distribution
Chris Metzler wrote: I've been waiting to post this until after the release went out, hoping there'd be more discussion when things were a tiny bit calmer . . . Over time, various people have done a lot of work on ground structures, etc., to add to the scenery for FlightGear. Frederic's did a lot of work on the bridges + downtown for SF; that's now distributed with the default area scenery. Franz Melchior did Vienna's Donaturm tower, complete with Actually it's Melchior Franz. ot agree with): 1. It's probably *not* the best idea for it to all just get added into the FlightGear scenery archives, to be there automatically when the terrain for an area gets downloaded from scenery.flightgear.org or its mirrors. There are already people having a hard time with framerates just with the structure in the default area. I imagine a scenario where a user fetches updated scenery files for an area they've been flying around for a while, and discovers suddenly that it's unusable now for them because of a recent addition of a bunch of framerate- crushing eye candy. I think that (now that we have a separate Objects directory) it is possible quite easily to add a command-line option to disable the static scenery objects. So what we discussed was a webpage/site which would (eventually) do for FlightGear what avsim.com/flightsim.com's file libraries do for MSFS. At least at first, it'd provide upload/browse/download capability. Eventually, it could also be a place to fetch useful scripts, programs, scenery-making tutorials, etc. It wouldn't necessarily require a chunk of Curt's time or hardware; it need not even be in the flightgear.org domain, although I think it'd be a good thing if it was (unfortunately, scenery.flightgear.org is occupied, hehe). Mat Churchill and I are both enthusiastic about such a scenery website. My personal opinion would be to get everything at one place, preferably (but not necessarily) in a separate CVS branch at flightgear.org just like the world wide scenery right now. That would be easiest for everybody (and provides mirror sites). Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Interesting 747 ground handling bug
Hi Guys, Okay, here's an interesting take-off problem. Try running fgfs --airport=FHAW --aircraft=747 The runway has a pretty big slope and as soon as the nose wheel hits the sloping part, the FDM freezes. Cheers, Durk P.S., running fgfs-0.9.5-pre3, base-0.9.5-pre3, and terrasync scenery download enabled. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] create craters and smoke effect
Boris Koenig writes: I mentioned primarily bzflag - cause it is based on SimGear Hmm .. very interesting . as bzflag predates SimGear ... could you please tell us your source of this information as I didn't see any mention of SimGear in a quick perusal of the bzflag source code Thanks Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] create craters and smoke effect
Norman Vine wrote: Boris Koenig writes: I mentioned primarily bzflag - cause it is based on SimGear Hmm .. very interesting . as bzflag predates SimGear ... lol, don't tell me now that I was wrong ? could you please tell us your source of this information as I didn't see any mention of SimGear in a quick perusal of the bzflag source code I didn't check the source code, it's just that I installed (compiled) bzflag some time ago and was quite sure that SimGear was one of the requirements for bzflag to run, don't know if I am confusing things now, will have to check their webpage for that. Sorry in advance if I should indeed be wrong, though. (sometimes memory does not serve correctly ...) --- Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
hi all, aborting means SIGABRT, IMHO. Unfortunately I've similar effects on my system, although they're appearing sporadic it is annoying. After several attempts fgfs starts then. I am not sure but it seems to be an issue in the FGAI. Just a guess. Regards Ron Here the gdb-backtrace: Starting program: /usr/bin/fgfs [New Thread 1024 (LWP 1692)] Unknown runway code 08 passed to GetReverseRunwayNo(...) Failed to find runway 08 at airport ETHB [New Thread 2049 (LWP 1693)] [New Thread 1026 (LWP 1694)] Initializing OpenAL sound manager [New Thread 2051 (LWP 1695)] engines off Program received signal SIGABRT, Aborted. [Switching to Thread 1024 (LWP 1692)] 0x403fb861 in kill () from /lib/libc.so.6 (gdb) bt #0 0x403fb861 in kill () from /lib/libc.so.6 #1 0x4003dacc in pthread_kill () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #2 0x4003dfd6 in raise () from /lib/libpthread.so.0 #3 0x403fcc81 in abort () from /lib/libc.so.6 #4 0x400e8b58 in __default_terminate () from /usr/lib/libGLU.so.1 #5 0x400e8b7d in __terminate () from /usr/lib/libGLU.so.1 #6 0x400e9636 in throw_helper () from /usr/lib/libGLU.so.1 #7 0x400e9805 in __throw () from /usr/lib/libGLU.so.1 #8 0x0842ac65 in FGAISchedule::update (this=0xa555c08, now=1091246021) at Schedule.cxx:292 #9 0x084227e7 in FGTrafficManager::update (this=0xa548ef8, something=0.0549750003) at TrafficMgr.cxx:88 #10 0x084e275b in SGSubsystemGroup::Member::update (this=0x9b911d0, delta_time_sec=0.0549750003) at subsystem_mgr.cxx:225 #11 0x084e20a2 in SGSubsystemGroup::update (this=0x8a54a5c, delta_time_sec=0.0549750003) at subsystem_mgr.cxx:115 #12 0x084e2acc in SGSubsystemMgr::update (this=0x8a54a40, delta_time_sec=0.0549750003) at subsystem_mgr.cxx:278 #13 0x08053a48 in fgMainLoop () at main.cxx:1228 #14 0x0809f141 in GLUTidle () at fg_os.cxx:113 #15 0x4005a1c6 in idleWait () from /usr/lib/libglut.so.3 #16 0x08057603 in fgMainInit (argc=1, argv=0xb464) at main.cxx:1779 #17 0x0804febe in main (argc=1, argv=0xb464) at bootstrap.cxx:175 ---Type return to continue, or q return to quit--- #18 0x403ea7ee in __libc_start_main () from /lib/libc.so.6 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
Hi Durk, here are the requested informations: fgfs-versions: FlightGear-0.9.5-pre2 / fgfs-base-0.9.5-pre2.tar.gz starting time: between 10:00am and 1:00pm (noon here in germany, while my son's sleeping...;-) ADEP: ETHB - Bückeburg, Germany (located in the e000n50 scenerey) with the Bo105 Regards Ron Durk Talsma schrieb: On Saturday 31 July 2004 12:26, Ron Lange wrote: did I say sporadic? I am just trying for 2 hours getting fgfs to start...damn Ron #8 0x0842ac65 in FGAISchedule::update (this=0xa555c08, now=1091246021) at Schedule.cxx:292 #9 0x084227e7 in FGTrafficManager::update (this=0xa548ef8, something=0.0549750003) at TrafficMgr.cxx:88 Hm, this appears to be a problem that is not related to missing traffic files. I'm currently at a loss as to what may cause an abort here, but I'll try to have a look this evening when I have time... In the mean time, can you please tell me: 1) What version you're using (release, cvs, and which base package?) 2) What time of the day you're starting filghtgear (simulated time that is). 3) What airport your starting from? TIA, Durk ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] FlightGear v0.9.5
For what it's worth, FlightGear 0.9.5 for IRIX is available at: http://www.1stweb.nl/~ehofman/fgfs/ Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: how to handle add-on ground scenery distribution
Chris Metzler wrote: [...] So what we discussed was a webpage/site which would (eventually) do for FlightGear what avsim.com/flightsim.com's file libraries do for MSFS. At least at first, it'd provide upload/browse/download capability. Even though I agree with Erik that it would make sense to keep everything in a central place I do also think that it should be easily possible for the mentioned user contributions to be added easily BY users - without the need for developers/project managers to take care of such things. So, I think the idea in general is pretty good, but regarding browser based file uploads there might be a problem when it comes to scenery packages: these files are usually pretty large, so it would be more realistic to provide anonymous FTP access for these uploads - also more convenient, I wouldn't want to wait for a large file to upload via browser without any status information at all... Eventually, it could also be a place to fetch useful scripts, programs, scenery-making tutorials, etc. As long as it would be running via some kind of CMS this would really be an advantage, as it could become a central repository for designers in general - be it scenery or aircraft. So that everybody could easily make direct contributions. Also, such a webpage could offer scenery download based not only on certain clickable areas but really based on certain towns/airports or even navaids. This would merely be a cross lookup between the navaids file and the actual scenery folders in order to determine which scenery package needs to be picked for a certain town/airport or navaid. One could even provide a flight plan in order to determine the necessary scenery downloads, I am not sure if TerraGear is using such an approach already, as I keep having problems with it ... It wouldn't necessarily require a chunk of Curt's time or hardware; No, as it sounds it would have the legitimation to become a separate webpage if necessary, probably one could even use a sourceforge project for that purpose...that way at least the resource problem would be solved ;-) it need not even be in the flightgear.org domain, although I think it'd be a good thing if it was (unfortunately, scenery.flightgear.org is occupied, hehe). Mat Churchill and I are both enthusiastic about such a scenery website. actually, it's not long ago that I sent an eMail to Curtis asking for other additions to the original FlightGear page that I suggested. I mentioned both of these already in previous postings on this mailing list, unfortunately there were not any reactions to these - absolutely contrary to the reactions to my usual posting ;-) On the one hand I suggested installing a bugtracker script and on the other hand a dynamic FAQ system. I did offer to take care of the installation/setup etc. - so it would not require much effort from other people in order to get these things done. So if Curtis should decide that he doesn't want to put something like that on FlightGear.org I would love to join your efforts so that we could put all these things on a different webpage, which should still be linked to from FlightGear.org - Curtis could set up a specific subdomain for exactly that purpose, so he would still keep his recource usage low(er). - Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
Hi Ron, That explains it: In version pre2, MD11 traffic is still generated, but the required aircraft is not included in the base package. Around the time one you're trying to start, one of the KLM MD11's starting from of heading for Asmterdam is probably causing trouble. Version pre3 has its own set of problems, but they should be fixed in the final release. Cheers, Durk On Saturday 31 July 2004 13:16, Ron Lange wrote: Hi Durk, here are the requested informations: fgfs-versions: FlightGear-0.9.5-pre2 / fgfs-base-0.9.5-pre2.tar.gz starting time: between 10:00am and 1:00pm (noon here in germany, while my son's sleeping...;-) ADEP: ETHB - Bückeburg, Germany (located in the e000n50 scenerey) with the Bo105 Regards Ron ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:42:48 -0400, Ampere wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On July 28, 2004 03:06 pm, Jon S Berndt wrote: So, from the point of view of the horizontal stabilizor, that pesky downwash happens because wings really suck. ;-) I guess that's one of the reasons why some planes use canards. =P ..that suck too. ;-) I think all aircraft suck. Only the ones that have a better design suck less. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
Erik Hofman writes: Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 21:42:48 -0400, Ampere wrote in message On July 28, 2004 03:06 pm, Jon S Berndt wrote: So, from the point of view of the horizontal stabilizor, that pesky downwash happens because wings really suck. ;-) I guess that's one of the reasons why some planes use canards. =P ..that suck too. ;-) I think all aircraft suck. Only the ones that have a better design suck less. No No .. it's the earth that sucks as there is no gravity ! Norman ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Interesting 747 ground handling bug
Durk Talsma wrote: Hi Guys, Okay, here's an interesting take-off problem. Try running fgfs --airport=FHAW --aircraft=747 The runway has a pretty big slope and as soon as the nose wheel hits the sloping part, the FDM freezes. Cheers, Durk P.S., running fgfs-0.9.5-pre3, base-0.9.5-pre3, and terrasync scenery download enabled. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d You're jst bottoming out. Happens at many airports. The new scenery has much flatter runways, but many of the big ones are still not perfectly flat like I suspect they should be. Josh ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Data source battle?
On Friday 30 July 2004 23:19, John Wojnaroski wrote: When using real-time weather via the net and the native-ctrls interface to input control data to FG it appears both sources attempt to write to the environmental properties; this is most noticeable with the wind vector and discontinuities in the ground speed turning off the specific wind properties update in native-ctrls clears up the conflict but restricts wind updates to the real-time system. Has anyone experienced this problem? Regards John W. This sounds like it may be at the bottom of some problems I've been having with weather. I don't use real weather because most of my flying is to test the fdms I'm working on, so I want predictable and consistent weather. What I'm experiencing though, is that on take-off, the wind and visibility settings are frequently incorrect for the altitude I'm at. For example, sometimes instead of getting 3 kts over the runway at start-up it's 6 kts i.e. the next layer up. Then sometimes, even if the ground layer is correct, as I gain altitude after take-off, instead of progressing through the different layers I'll get a jump as it skips a layer or two so I get 6000 ft or 9000 ft settings at 1000 ft instead of the 3000 ft settings. I can use the weather gui to correct this but I may need to click the 'Apply' button many times before the weather settings change. Then to cap it all, when I then click 'OK' to close the gui, the weather sometimes reverts back to an incorrect setting. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] Data source battle?
I don't use real weather because most of my flying is to test the fdms I'm working on, Just so I am clear, when you say fdms are you referring to Flight Dynamics Model source code, or are you referring to something I'd call an Aircraft Flight Model (AFM) or Aircraft Flight Model Definition (AFMD). I don't mean to sound snobbish, but when I think of FDM I think of math (equations of motion). The aircraft definition files - whether it be a JSBSim aircraft definition file, a YASim one, or whatever - define the aircraft - which the FDM code interprets and brings to life. We've never really discussed terminology as far as I can remember, but maybe a clarification would be good - if only so that my filter rules don't categorize messages incorrectly. :-) Jon ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Data source battle?
On Saturday 31 July 2004 17:02, Jon Berndt wrote: I don't use real weather because most of my flying is to test the fdms I'm working on, Just so I am clear, when you say fdms are you referring to Flight Dynamics Model source code, or are you referring to something I'd call an Aircraft Flight Model (AFM) or Aircraft Flight Model Definition (AFMD). I don't mean to sound snobbish, but when I think of FDM I think of math (equations of motion). The aircraft definition files - whether it be a JSBSim aircraft definition file, a YASim one, or whatever - define the aircraft - which the FDM code interprets and brings to life. We've never really discussed terminology as far as I can remember, but maybe a clarification would be good - if only so that my filter rules don't categorize messages incorrectly. :-) Jon Hello Jon, I'm not referring to Flight Data Model source code but to the xml config for a particular aircraft - AFM/AFMD I guess. I was using that terminology because I copied it from some existing stuff. LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
Thank you Durk! I hope that someone is making a patch of the final base package soon...;-) then I'll get out of trouble. Ron Durk Talsma schrieb: Hi Ron, That explains it: In version pre2, MD11 traffic is still generated, but the required aircraft is not included in the base package. Around the time one you're trying to start, one of the KLM MD11's starting from of heading for Asmterdam is probably causing trouble. Version pre3 has its own set of problems, but they should be fixed in the final release. Cheers, Durk On Saturday 31 July 2004 13:16, Ron Lange wrote: Hi Durk, here are the requested informations: fgfs-versions: FlightGear-0.9.5-pre2 / fgfs-base-0.9.5-pre2.tar.gz starting time: between 10:00am and 1:00pm (noon here in germany, while my son's sleeping...;-) ADEP: ETHB - Bückeburg, Germany (located in the e000n50 scenerey) with the Bo105 Regards Ron ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
Ron Lange wrote: Thank you Durk! I hope that someone is making a patch of the final base package soon...;-) Just to get this straight: you'd need a patch from pre2 - 0.9.5 ? Is there anybody else who would like to see such a patch ? Arnt, for which pre-version do you need a patch ? Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Data source battle?
- Original Message - From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: FlightGear developers discussions [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, July 31, 2004 8:46 AM Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Data source battle? On Friday 30 July 2004 23:19, John Wojnaroski wrote: When using real-time weather via the net and the native-ctrls interface to input control data to FG it appears both sources attempt to write to the environmental properties; this is most noticeable with the wind vector and discontinuities in the ground speed turning off the specific wind properties update in native-ctrls clears up the conflict but restricts wind updates to the real-time system. Has anyone experienced this problem? Regards John W. This sounds like it may be at the bottom of some problems I've been having with weather. The problem occurs when using the native-ctrls sockets and protocols to send a control packet from the sim hardware to FG at a 24Hz rate. The native-ctrls.cxx updates the property tree with the values in the packet which may or may not be set by the sender. On the next frame, the real-time weather kicks in until the next data packet arrives. If you need or want only part of the packet you have to hack the code. There is a section of code in native-ctrls.cxx around line #386 that updates the property tree with the values in the received packet. Normally, this function should not run unless you've enabled the native-ctrls protocol and socket. Curtis posted an email about two months ago soliciting some ideas and thoughts on the whole topic of the interface between the FDMs, FG, and the network. Rework in that area would be a major effort. Especially if the idea is to provide support for a network of machines running portions of a simulator such as aircraft subsystems, displays, hardware driver interfaces, FDMs, visual systems, etc Regards John W. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
Dear Boris! Just a patch chain (pre2-pre3-final) would be nice... Regards Ron Boris Koenig schrieb: Ron Lange wrote: Thank you Durk! I hope that someone is making a patch of the final base package soon...;-) Just to get this straight: you'd need a patch from pre2 - 0.9.5 ? Is there anybody else who would like to see such a patch ? Arnt, for which pre-version do you need a patch ? Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] fgfs aborted with the dc3
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 21:07:28 +0200, Ron wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Boris Koenig schrieb: Ron Lange wrote: Thank you Durk! I hope that someone is making a patch of the final base package soon...;-) Just to get this straight: you'd need a patch from pre2 - 0.9.5 ? Is there anybody else who would like to see such a patch ? Arnt, for which pre-version do you need a patch ? ..I don't. ;-) Just do as Ron says: Dear Boris! Just a patch chain (pre2-pre3-final) would be nice... Regards Ron -- ..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 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
Arnt Karlsen wrote: Erik (Ever used the bicycle to cycle up a steep hill?) ..is overhang steep enough? ;-) On a bicycle? Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: how to handle add-on ground scenery distribution
Jon Stockill wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: My personal opinion would be to get everything at one place, preferably (but not necessarily) in a separate CVS branch at flightgear.org just like the world wide scenery right now. That would be easiest for everybody (and provides mirror sites). That makes life very easy for us, but it's far from newbie friendly. What's wrong with the way world wide terrain data can be downloaded for FlightGear right now? Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] RFD: how to handle add-on ground scenery distribution
Erik Hofman wrote: Jon Stockill wrote: Erik Hofman wrote: My personal opinion would be to get everything at one place, preferably (but not necessarily) in a separate CVS branch at flightgear.org just like the world wide scenery right now. That would be easiest for everybody (and provides mirror sites). That makes life very easy for us, but it's far from newbie friendly. What's wrong with the way world wide terrain data can be downloaded for FlightGear right now? Nothing at all - point and click is good, and makes is incredibly easy for anyone who can use a browser to get the scenery they want. Maybe I misunderstood what you meant - I thought you were talking about just having a cvs repository for all the extras, I'm thinking now you intended for it to be checked out onto a server in the same way as the website is - is that correct? -- Jon Stockill [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] CVS - problem
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 16:11:29 +0100
Vivian Meazza [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I downloaded FGFS cvs this morning. There appears to be an error in
gui.nas:
166 if(cap 1) { continue; }
I assume this to be a typo or corruption. I guess that it should be
166 if(cap = 0.1) { continue; }
ISR this having been mentioned at some time. Even if this line is
corrected, it doesn't seem to work with JBS models. Has an old version
crept back in? Let's hope it's not in release 0.9.5, although it's not
critical.
I have:
}# Hack, to ignore the ghost tanks created by the C++ code.
}if(cap 1) { continue; }
}
}title = tcell(fuelTable, text, i+1, 0);
that is, 1 rather than = 0.1.
-c
--
Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(remove snip-me. to email)
As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I
have become civilized. - Chief Luther Standing Bear
pgpynWhkvRVXj.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Taildragger takeoff and landing
On Sat, 31 Jul 2004 22:44:19 +0200, Erik wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Arnt Karlsen wrote: Erik (Ever used the bicycle to cycle up a steep hill?) ..is overhang steep enough? ;-) On a bicycle? ..yup. Classic case of _find_-a-way and stay-_off_-the-brakes to pull G's, but the 2 flat tires, sucked. Gravel pit ridge race. ;-) -- ..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 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear v0.9.5
I'll have the Red Hat/Fedora packages available in the next day or so. On Sat, 2004-07-31 at 00:36, Curtis L. Olson wrote: The official v0.9.5 source tarball and base package is now up on the ftp sites and I've updated the website as well. I plan to email out an official announcement later today, but I'd love to collect as many pre-built packages as possible in advance. So if you are one of our package builders, please let me know as soon as you have v0.9.5 ready to go and I will update the web site. Linux Slackware get's first prize this time around. Jon is quick. :-) Thanks! Curt. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
RE: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear v0.9.5
Did someone already do a CYgWin build? ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
