Re: [Flightgear-devel] Validating XML parser
On Donnerstag 30 September 2004 22:33, Jon S Berndt wrote: I ask because it is becoming clear to me that, as I compose the new parsing logic for JSBSim config files - as well as the new config file format itself - I may need to provide error checking / validation functions as the data is read in. There are just too many opportunities to mess up the config file. Ideally, this kind of thing would be done by a config file editor, but since there is no config file editor on the horizon, validation of a config file against a DTD becomes quite attractive. IMHO, it simplifies parsing logic in the end application (in this case, JSBSim). :) .. yeah! This is definitly a good idea! Now, this raises another question: do general purpose (or configurable) XML application editors (open source or free, preferred) exist that could be used to author a JSBSim config file? There are. I believe that emacs' xml mode is able to validate. There must be other too ... Greetings Mathias -- Mathias Fröhlich, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] new version
It is known (+ or -) the date of release (win32 binary) of new version? Antonio Pennino Nocera Informatica s.r.l. telefono: 035/4219033 telefax : 035/4219050 e-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new version
Antonio Pennino wrote: It is known (+ or -) the date of release (win32 binary) of new version? If Curtis can find the time, the plan is to release it this weekend. But only _if_ Curtis can find the time. Erik ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Memory usage
Hello, after reading a LWN article I started playing with the memory ovcercommit switch on a Linux box. Later I wondered why I wasn't unable to run FG reliably anymore and ran a 'top' to see what's going on here. I noticed that FG appears to lock huge amounts of memory - and the X server as well. Can anyone confirm similar experience ? top - 14:09:04 up 23:12, 2 users, load average: 1.10, 0.40, 0.14 Tasks: 137 total, 2 running, 135 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 82.8% user, 17.2% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle, 0.0% IO-wait Mem:513644k total, 510292k used, 3352k free,58532k buffers Swap: 265064k total, 200k used, 264864k free, 131260k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEMTIME+ COMMAND 6127 mas 25 0 583m 173m 275m R 93.1 34.6 0:49.44 fgfs 6180 mas 15 0 583m 173m 275m S 4.3 34.6 0:00.79 fgfs 969 root 15 0 325m 57m 270m S 2.3 11.5 10:20.58 X [...] 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 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Memory usage
Martin Spott wrote: Hello, after reading a LWN article I started playing with the memory ovcercommit switch on a Linux box. Later I wondered why I wasn't unable to run FG reliably anymore and ran a 'top' to see what's going on here. I noticed that FG appears to lock huge amounts of memory - and the X server as well. Can anyone confirm similar experience ? If you want to hear a strong opinion about Flightgear's memory management, simply run the following: # valgrind fgfs ;-) - Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
[Flightgear-devel] Back online
I had no connection for some time. I did not work on the fmc this last weeks, I wanted to change my mind so I played with some piece of code to try some possible enhancement to the graphical environment (sky, cloud, weather). I got nothing that really convice me, we will see that later. I have put the source code of the prototype fmc here : http://www.chez.com/tipunch/flightgear/fmc/fmc.html I would appreciate some comments. Harald. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Boris Koenig wrote: Harald has even created some preview screenshots of his FMC project: http://www.chez.com/tipunch/flightgear Hmmm, do I recognize my own photo there? With the small damage to the MCDU casing near the left annunciators? :-) I have this photo up to 1280x1024 (bigger, actually) --- ask! Straight from the Lufthansa sim. Jeroen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d You are right. I had this image on my HD and could not remember from where it came. I am sorry. Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. Harald. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
Harald JOHNSEN wrote: You are right. I had this image on my HD and could not remember from where it came. shouldn't be a problem - particularly not if you still favor the skin-able approach :-) I am sorry. Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. I think you may have misunderstood Jeroen: he seemed to be willing to make it available for FlightGear purposes ? :-) -- Boris ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Memory usage
Boris Koenig wrote: If you want to hear a strong opinion about Flightgear's memory management, simply run the following: # valgrind fgfs Oh yeah: quickstep: 18:07:42 ~ valgrind /opt/FlightGear/bin/fgfs [... lots of stuff I probably might want to have a look at ] disInstr: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF 0x5E 0xC8 0xF disInstr: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF 0x5E 0xC8 0xF Illegal instruction ;-) Me too, 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 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] new version
Erik Hofman wrote: Antonio Pennino wrote: It is known (+ or -) the date of release (win32 binary) of new version? If Curtis can find the time, the plan is to release it this weekend. But only _if_ Curtis can find the time. It turns out I have personal commitments Friday night, all day Saturday, and most of Sunday so I will try for a release by middle of next week some time. Curt. -- Curtis Olsonhttp://www.flightgear.org/~curt HumanFIRST Program http://www.humanfirst.umn.edu/ FlightGear Project http://www.flightgear.org Unique text:2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:27:09 +0200, Harald wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Boris Koenig wrote: Harald has even created some preview screenshots of his FMC project: http://www.chez.com/tipunch/flightgear Hmmm, do I recognize my own photo there? With the small damage to the MCDU casing near the left annunciators? :-) I have this photo up to 1280x1024 (bigger, actually) --- ask! Straight from the Lufthansa sim. You are right. I had this image on my HD and could not remember from where it came. I am sorry. Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. ..uh, you can't _distribute_ it. Chk the original license. ..and ask the owner to license it under The One Right License, the GPL. ;-) -- ..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] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 01:27:09PM +0200, Harald JOHNSEN wrote: Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. I don't have the exact details of the GPL in mind, but this photo was taken by a Lufthansa employee in employer's time (he maintains the sims and is on call while they run, but has not always loads of work to do). However it was specifically meant for me, to make that MCDU. I suppose that I can arrange for some kind of copyright transfer, but as I said I don't know the GPL very well and don't know whether this is possible. The photo was NOT taken from any product by any organisation or company whatsoever. Ok, Honeywell, maybe. But that problem you will have forever. Jeroen ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
On Fri, 1 Oct 2004 19:04:01 +0200, Jeroen wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Oct 01, 2004 at 01:27:09PM +0200, Harald JOHNSEN wrote: Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. I don't have the exact details of the GPL in mind, but this photo was taken by a Lufthansa employee in employer's time (he maintains the sims and is on call while they run, but has not always loads of work to do). However it was specifically meant for me, to make that MCDU. ..and now you want to carry on develop it further. ;-) I suppose that I can arrange for some kind of copyright transfer, but as I said I don't know the GPL very well and don't know whether this is possible. ..the very best way _is_ the GPL, if he licensed it to you for this purpose, and your MCDU work needs a stronger license, go for http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html and the http://www.fsf-europe.org/projects/fla/fla.en.html ..the first time _ever_ the GPL is being challenged in court, is in the The SCO Group v IBM lawsuit in Utah, http://groklaw.net/ , where TSCOG drag its feet on evidence discovery despite year old court orders and instead writes Congress to try have them rule the GPL and US copyright law, unconstitutional in the US. ;-) .._everybody_ else has backed off from legal procedings because of the wise way the GPL makes use of Copyright Law in all countries, in the EU, copyright is not transferable, so, we close that hole with the FLA. ;-) The photo was NOT taken from any product by any organisation or company whatsoever. Ok, Honeywell, maybe. But that problem you will have forever. ..IBM is making a major legal and PR investment in the Utah Court, shepardizing Republican Judges Kimball and Wells into closing _every_ appeal route opportunity on Utah's Republican Senator Orrin B. Hatch' son and TSCOG counsel, Brent Hatch. ;-) Groklaw is _great_ fun. ;-) ..IBM's counsel is known as Nazgul for a reason, think legal pile driver. Oh, and, brent in norwegian means 'burned'. ;-) -- ..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] VATSIM/IVAO integration MCDU/FMC
On Friday 01 October 2004 17:40, Arnt Karlsen wrote: On Fri, 01 Oct 2004 13:27:09 +0200, Harald wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers wrote: On Thu, Sep 30, 2004 at 02:54:21PM +0200, Boris Koenig wrote: Harald has even created some preview screenshots of his FMC project: http://www.chez.com/tipunch/flightgear Hmmm, do I recognize my own photo there? With the small damage to the MCDU casing near the left annunciators? :-) I have this photo up to 1280x1024 (bigger, actually) --- ask! Straight from the Lufthansa sim. You are right. I had this image on my HD and could not remember from where it came. I am sorry. Now that you said from where it comes, its even more obvious that we can't keep it as we need gpl material. ..uh, you can't _distribute_ it. Chk the original license. ..and ask the owner to license it under The One Right License, the GPL. ;-) One license to bind them all... ;) LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Sub-model and joystick problems
On Thursday 30 September 2004 20:01, Lee Elliott wrote: On Thursday 30 September 2004 09:27, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote: On Thursday 30 September 2004 04:22 am, Lee Elliott wrote: The problem with my joystick seems to be related to the recent plib updates and it isn't being identified properly within FG. jstest jscal identify it ok but neither FG or js_demo see it properly. This was something that a few people wrote about recently but I'd like to confirm that other people are still having the same problem on Linux with the latest cvs versions of plib, SimGear and FlightGear. I also had this problem. My joystick was identifies as by Flightgear and js_demo. I found out that plib was using jsLinuxOld.cxx instead of jsLinux.cxx. To solve this I defined JS_NEW in js.h like this: #define JS_NEW 1 just below JS_TRUE and JS_FALSE. And rebuilt plib. A proper solution I guess would be to figure out why JS_NEW isn't defined by the configure script. I grep'ed the entire plib dir, but IIRC JS_NEW was only found in jsLinux.cxx and jsLinuxOld.cxx. Thanks again - that did it:) LeeE That's one prob out of the way, but... could someone on Linux confirm that the ballistic sub-model stuff works properly for them? The only outstanding difference Vivian and I could identify between our systems is that his is Windows based whereas I'm running Linux. Things work properly on his system but don't on either of the two different (in both h/w s/w respects - i.e. different video cards cpu etc to different kernels 2.4.x vs. 2.6.x and different Debian unstable snap-shots) systems that I've tried. If we can eliminate this difference we know we need to dig deeper into something else... LeeE ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Sub-model and joystick problems
Lee Elliott wrote: could someone on Linux confirm that the ballistic sub-model stuff works properly for them? The only outstanding difference Vivian and I could identify between our systems is that his is Windows based whereas I'm running Linux. Things work properly on his system but don't on either of the two different (in both h/w s/w respects - i.e. different video cards cpu etc to different kernels 2.4.x vs. 2.6.x and different Debian unstable snap-shots) systems that I've tried. If we can eliminate this difference we know we need to dig deeper into something else... LeeE well, as I mailed two weeks ago, for me it works :-) Maybe I don't know *exactly* what that stuff is supposed to do. What I have is - FG/SG/etc CVS 2004-09-18 23:00 UTC - plib-1.8.3 - Linux SuSE 9.1 - Kernel 2.6.4 - nVidia GF2 MX What I do is - start FG with --fg-root=/usr/local/FlightGear/data --fg-scenery=/usr/local/FlightGear/data/Scenery --airport-id=KNUQ --runway=14L --aircraft=spitfireIIa --control=joystick --enable-random-objects --enable-horizon-effect --enable-enhanced-lighting --enable-distance-attenuation --enable-ai-models --geometry=1024x768 --bpp=32 --timeofday=noon - trigger via property browser What I see/hear is - I canon firing - (very)little red dots from within the cockpit seeming to leave the cannon - (very)little red dots from outside seeming to leave the cannon *that works with --enable-ai-models* - without I see nothing If you need additional info, tell me! Horst ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Memory usage
Is this by any chance related to the poor framerate that some of us have? Ampere On October 1, 2004 12:09 pm, Martin Spott wrote: Boris Koenig wrote: If you want to hear a strong opinion about Flightgear's memory management, simply run the following: # valgrind fgfs Oh yeah: quickstep: 18:07:42 ~ valgrind /opt/FlightGear/bin/fgfs [... lots of stuff I probably might want to have a look at ] disInstr: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF 0x5E 0xC8 0xF disInstr: unhandled instruction bytes: 0xF 0x5E 0xC8 0xF Illegal instruction ;-) Me too, Martin. ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
