Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
Hans, as I wrote I am writing code for this feature since a year. The first implementation was bad (only in Perl). Now I am using C - that's quite more stable. On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 05:57:34PM -0600, Hans Fugal wrote: [...] First, if you're not intimate with VOIP let me tell you (without discouraging you, I hope) that it won't be as easy as you might think. There's too much going on; it's like herding cats. You have to deal with sound card input, NAT and firewalls, VOIP protocols, and somehow orchestrating it all. Then you have to have someone manage something like Asterisk on a server to provide the conference call capabililty. Certainly doable, but not a weekend project as I'm sure the others working on it are well aware. In fact thats a real problem. But the solution for some of the problems is libiaxclient (a portable softphone with the VoIP-Protocol IAX). I don't think that this will solve all problems. I am working with VoIP a long time (and with different protocols and manufacturers). But IAX has an ALSA/JACK/PortAudio Interface - so the problems for the sound are only the configuration of ALSA. Also IAX works fine over NAT due to use only _one_ port for signalisation and media streaming. I'm not sure what the best approach would be, but I am inclined to think it would be somehow talking to an existing VOIP client via IPC and driving it to join/create the appropriate conference channels. I'm not aware of any client that can be driven in this way, and I'm almost sure that there's nothing cross-platform to fit the bill. You could rip the SIP code out of something like Twinkle, but I'd advise against that for one simple reason: getting VOIP working (especially SIP) is hard enough when you've got a full-featured softphone or ATA or IP phone. Stick things behind a façade like a FlightGear radio and it will be all the more difficult to troubleshoot and 60%-70% will simply be unable to get it working. I know that sounds like exaggerated pessimism, but in my experience there's always *something* that goes wrong in configuring VOIP. I don't think that all implemenations of FGCOM will work out of the box. The real problem is that I cannot distribute a static binary - it won't work at this time (and I don't know why) - everyone has to compile the sources. But my hope is that it will work for 90% of the users who know gcc and how to install libraries. My only intent here is to throw out the thoughts that I have about what might trip someone up in doing this, so they can be considered and addressed from the beginning. I don't want to discourage anyone from this, which would be a very cool feature, nor from VOIP in general. I think that I have solved some of the problems you mentioned - not all. But in my opinion (and my hope) the solution for VoIP conferences is closer than your thoughts ;-) Regards, Holger (sorry for my bad english...) -- # ## ## Holger Wirtz Phone : (+49 30) 884299-40 ## ## ## ### ## DFN-Verein Fax : (+49 30) 884299-70 ## ## ## Stresemannstr. 78E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## ## ## ## ### 10963 Berlin # ## ## ## GERMANY WWW : http://www.dfn.de GPG-Fingerprint: ABFA 1F51 DD8D 503C 85DC 0C51 E961 79E2 6685 9BCF - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] The Release
olaf flebbe wrote: Durk Talsma wrote: SimGear require plib-1.8.4, but this version no longer builds on my box There is still an patch for MSVC8 waiting to be applied. Looking at that patch, it seems entirely typecast stuff. Those are warning conditions; I don't see any changes that would affect the generated code. Sure, it would be good to get plib to fix their typing conventions, but I can't see why it would stop it from building, and in for the purpose of our release the distinction is meaningless. Andy - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
* Vivian Meazza -- 9/3/2007 10:22 AM: That would be 90% of the 10% who aren't Windows users then? Don't forget that by far the majority of our users out there are on Windows, as opposed to the developers for whom the ratio is probably reversed. While I agree with your demand to keep fgfs cross-platform, which is one of its central properties, I don't buy the 90% of the fgfs users are on Windows myth. This is solely based on Curt's download statistics and thus completely flawed. 1. download != use 2. flightgear.org isn't the only source Sure, many more MS Windows users may download fgfs from flightgear.org. They don't have any other relevant download source. Most of them probably decide to stick with their free (= illegal) copy of MSFS, because it's just prettier. Linux users will tend to stick with fgfs, because there's just no alternative on Unix/Linux. But they probably download much less from flightgear.org, but rather from their distribution's repository (cvs/apt/yast/...) m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
Hi all! Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Vivian Meazza -- 9/3/2007 10:22 AM: That would be 90% of the 10% who aren't Windows users then? Don't forget that by far the majority of our users out there are on Windows, as opposed to the developers for whom the ratio is probably reversed. While I agree with your demand to keep fgfs cross-platform, which is one of its central properties, I don't buy the 90% of the fgfs users are on Windows myth. This is solely based on Curt's download statistics and thus completely flawed. Independent of that it's probably better to have something working for at least one or a few platforms than to have nothing at all. Remember? Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. ;-) Cheers, Ralf - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
Vivian, On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 09:22:39AM +0100, Vivian Meazza wrote: [...] channels. I'm not aware of any client that can be driven in this way, and I'm almost sure that there's nothing cross-platform to fit the bill. You could ^^ This has concerned me for some time on this development. rip the SIP code out of something like Twinkle, but I'd advise against that for one simple reason: getting VOIP working (especially SIP) is hard enough when you've got a full-featured softphone or ATA or IP phone. Stick things behind a façade like a FlightGear radio and it will be all the more difficult to troubleshoot and 60%-70% will simply be unable to get it working. I know that sounds like exaggerated pessimism, but in my experience there's always *something* that goes wrong in configuring VOIP. I don't think that all implementations of FGCOM will work out of the box. The real problem is that I cannot distribute a static binary - it won't work at this time (and I don't know why) - everyone has to compile the sources. But my hope is that it will work for 90% of the users who know gcc and how to install libraries. That would be 90% of the 10% who aren't Windows users then? Don't forget that by far the majority of our users out there are on Windows, as opposed to the developers for whom the ratio is probably reversed. We are cross-platform, and anything you develop should ideally conform to this policy. I do appreciate that this might be impracticable at this time. Ok, I thaught that there are not so much more Windows users than *nix. But even more Windows users than I thaught are not the really problem, because I think that everything I wrote _is_ portable. The problem is that I cannot check this because I have no idea and time (and at least interest) in compiling under Windows. But the fact is: - (lib)iaxclient is portable - libxml is also portable (and maybe replaced by an own implementation soon) - and my C code is only glue between the libraries and some simple math. There is nothing more than this! The main work (the VoIP client) is done inside iaxclient (so I am the big blender: everyone thinks I am a guru in writing VoIP applications but I only use (GPL) software and put some code around :-) ). What is definitely not portable is the VoIP-Server. Even the code is actualy only working under Linux it may run under Windows. Lets start with one OS and if it works lets try to port it. Regards, Holger -- # ## ## Holger Wirtz Phone : (+49 30) 884299-40 ## ## ## ### ## DFN-Verein Fax : (+49 30) 884299-70 ## ## ## Stresemannstr. 78E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ## ## ## ## ### 10963 Berlin # ## ## ## GERMANY WWW : http://www.dfn.de GPG-Fingerprint: ABFA 1F51 DD8D 503C 85DC 0C51 E961 79E2 6685 9BCF - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
* Ralf Gerlich -- 9/3/2007 6:41 PM: Melchior FRANZ wrote: While I agree with your demand to keep fgfs cross-platform, which is one of its central properties, I don't buy the 90% of the fgfs users are on Windows myth. Independent of that it's probably better to have something working for at least one or a few platforms than to have nothing at all. Remember? Huh? I'm actually member of the choir that you are preaching to. As I said: cross-platformness is a major project goal that I fully support. My response was exclusively referring to the occasionally stated, and most likely wrong thesis that almost all fgfs users are really running MS Windows, and only a minority one of the Unices. I wouldn't be surprised if it was closer to 50/50, but we have AFAIK no serious base for estimation. And it shouldn't really matter, anyway, given that we want to be cross-platform ... :-) m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Addition of true comms in multiplayer
Hi! Melchior FRANZ wrote: * Ralf Gerlich -- 9/3/2007 6:41 PM: Melchior FRANZ wrote: While I agree with your demand to keep fgfs cross-platform, which is one of its central properties, I don't buy the 90% of the fgfs users are on Windows myth. Independent of that it's probably better to have something working for at least one or a few platforms than to have nothing at all. Remember? Huh? I'm actually member of the choir that you are preaching to. As I said: cross-platformness is a major project goal that I fully support. Hrm, I'd probably better kept to my own principles of being exact in e-Mails. Essentially, I only wanted to avoid having a discussion here on what exactly the user-share among the OS's is, because I see it as mostly irrelevant, as long as somebody finally got his/her (Do we have female project members, anyway? ;-) ) guts together and started working. And - of course - the ultimate goal is to be cross-platform, which will make this discussion irrelevant for yet another reason as soon as the module evolves ;-) I'm sorry if I wasn't clear enough on that. Cheers, Ralf - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] New Movies From Aerotro
Hi, I have now done an Alternate version of Part 2 of my movie, until other suitable introduction music is compiled for us by helijah, :o) which can still be used in a later episode or this one. This is also being uploaded to YouTube YouTube Part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/v/S8ItPszj5V0 Meanwhile the High Q version can be retrieved from here: Download from: http://files.ww.com/files/38580.html (DivX Format uses DivX Decoder) -- I also did Part 1A which is before Oleg arrives on Nimitz and gets stuck in the cables. YouTube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hk5J0eRTwMs Google Video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5179061433444169102 Download Link http://files.ww.com/files/38515.html http://files.ww.com/getfile.html/38515/1311374275/Ogel-1A.divx Also an enhanced version of Part 1B is here: YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BP9rI9L8Yk Download Link http://files.ww.com/files/38582.html Google Video http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8376979290990780618 All the best, Aerotro Ortorea Online FlightGear Simulator Tracker Page. http://mpserver04.flightgear.org http://www.flightgear.org- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] The Release
olaf flebbe wrote: You may be wrong. They are writing to const char *. I had to strdup(). A const char* is exactly the same thing as a regular pointer at the level of CPU instructions. Writing to it does exactly the same thing as writing to a non-const pointer. The difference exists at *compile* time only. If MSVC is complaining about it, just adjust the warning level. Are you maybe trying to say that plib is writing to a static string constant? That would be a pretty serious bug if true, but as far as I can see it's not. Your use of strdup() is just adding an extra (and needless) step. Have you tried just adding a typecast instead? Again, the point here isn't whether or not plib's code is clean and will compile without warnings on MSVC. The point is whether it works the same as it does on our other platforms. Build issues are plib's problem, not ours. Andy - This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now http://get.splunk.com/ ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
