Anyone transmitting un-encrypted data across a world wide internet (as
opposed to a private intranet) needs to think ahead a little. Every
hacker will be rubbing their hands with glee before trying to hit you
on these ports you have just announced. A server/client or even
peer-to-peer
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi,
I hope I don't say too much if I say that there is work planned on
defining taxiways by means of polylines in TaxiDraw.
Excellent!
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Paul Surgeon wrote:
On Saturday 15 October 2005 20:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought about the taxiway structure/format a while back.
I came to the conclusion that a raw polygon editor is about the only way
you're going to be able to create taxiways properly.
You mean, ac3d or
* Vassilii Khachaturov -- Saturday 15 October 2005 21:28:
The default aircraft behaviour on the menu WB dialog command is to
report a NASAL error on the STDERR of flightgear, with no reaction
in the game window. Included is a patch that pops up a dialog
instead, explaining why that wouldn't
Ladislav Michnovič wrote:
Hello.
Using new gcc 4.0 I have some serios warnings about uninitialized
variables, that are used. I created a patch, but I have no idea if it
is possible to do it my way. Can you check this out please? It would
be great if it will be fixed in next release. The CVS
network connection to a flight simulation network, such as VATSIM or
IVAO, which is based on the fsd (Flight Simulator Daemon) protocol. This
is particulary useful for players who wish to have multiple network
clients active at the same time. In tech-terms, PCProxy is a
multi-connect
The length is due to the diff inability to say that a lot of lines
were just indented right (as they were put inside an else {} )
(To verify that quickly, try applying the diff locally and do a
cvs diff -bu
which then would ignore everything except the substantial change.)
BTW, is there a way
Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
The best way I found to counter the z-buffer fighting is simply to
disable z-buffer testing.
Remember, we are painting the ground, why would we want any z tests
(you can find situation where
this add artifacts of course).
Exactly, if you disable the z-buffer, you lose
On Saturday 15 October 2005 23:44, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi,
I hope I don't say too much if I say that there is work planned on
defining taxiways by means of polylines in TaxiDraw.
That's still very restrictive. It's a step in the right direction but is still
far from what is needed. We need
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our and VATSIM/IVAO flying...
It's not a matter if it _should_ or not. The relevant details of the
protocol, at least as used by VASTIM,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Surgeon schrieb:
On Saturday 15 October 2005 23:44, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi,
I hope I don't say too much if I say that there is work planned on
defining taxiways by means of polylines in TaxiDraw.
That's still very restrictive. It's a
Dave writes:
I certainly sympathise with this point of view. The current format is
certainly crude. However, the problems with it only become apparent close
up, when either close to or on the ground, and trying to follow taxiways
at intersections. The taxiway layouts done in the current
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If editing taxiways becomes as easy as importing the image data, a lot
more people will do it and we'll all wind up with more airports (and a
better user experience.)
I don't find creating an airport and taxiways in TaxiDraw that
challenging. As with all manual work
Hi,
Christian Mayer schrieb:
Paul Surgeon schrieb:
On Saturday 15 October 2005 23:44, Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi,
I hope I don't say too much if I say that there is work planned on
defining taxiways by means of polylines in TaxiDraw.
That's still very restrictive. It's a step in the right
Is it just me, or is it completely impossible to escape from instant replay
once engaged in the current CVS?
Cheers - Dave
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
David Luff wrote:
Is it just me, or is it completely impossible to escape from instant replay
once engaged in the current CVS?
You can end the repeating loop by pressing 'p' twice.
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
On Sun, 2005-10-16 at 17:11 +0100, David Luff wrote:
Is it just me, or is it completely impossible to escape from instant replay
once engaged in the current CVS?
Cheers - Dave
Yes, It's just you :-P
You can stop the replay by select the View menu, select instant replay.
On the Instant
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our and VATSIM/IVAO flying...
It's not a matter if it _should_ or not. The relevant details of the
protocol, at least as used by VASTIM, are 'closed',
Security by
Oliver Schroeder wrote:
So the server has to reread the port from the UDP header
everytime it reseives new data from the client and recreate a
socket for it (and clse the existing one of course).
Er, no. Check the man page of sendto. :)
The server only needs one socket for its whole
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
The length is due to the diff inability to say that a lot of
lines were just indented right (as they were put inside an else
{} )
Use the -w argument to diff to eliminate the whitespace noise for
readability.
But regardless, don't do this. :)
Wrapping huge blocks
* Andy Ross -- Sunday 16 October 2005 19:32:
YASim is the only FDM that reads those properties,
Which *does* make it a YASim-only dialog. Not for you and me, maybe,
but for those who will have to live a *very* long time with 0.9.9.
Just that those don't know why it sometimes works, and
What about this: in the 0.9.9 release we pop up a dialog that says:
Not implemented for this type of aircraft.
And after the release: *Still* not implemented in JSBSim!. ;-)
m.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Hans-Georg Wunder wrote:
Jeff McBride wrote:
The patch committed by Erik:
http://cvs.flightgear.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs/viewcvs.cgi/source/src/Autopilot/xmlauto.cxx.diff?r1=1.19r2=1.20cvsroot=FlightGear-0.9
should fix this. This is what would happen when you set
delta_u_n = u_max - u_n_1 :
On Sun, 16 Oct 2005 19:11:51 +0200 (IST), Vassilii wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our and VATSIM/IVAO flying...
It's not a matter if it _should_ or not.
Another point is that I am not always able to contact the tower when
pressing the ' key, even though I am on the correct radiofrequency.
Since this appears to be a bug I'll continue this discussion on the
developer list.(I assume I shouldn't post this message on both lists?)
Further
Jim Campbell wrote:
Anyone transmitting un-encrypted data across a world wide
internet needs to think ahead a little. Every hacker will be
rubbing their hands with glee before trying to hit you on these
ports you have just announced.
[...]
This really isn't much of an issue. The attack you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
I'm not sure how important giving back to Robin's DB is for the
FlightGear community but in the OpenSource manner I'd say we should try
to find a way of not doing things twice in two communities.
We should try to scratch
Christian Mayer wrote:
Ralf Gerlich schrieb:
I'm not sure how important giving back to Robin's DB is for the
FlightGear community but in the OpenSource manner I'd say we should try
to find a way of not doing things twice in two communities.
We should try to scratch only our own itch.
you might try
http://sourceforge.net/projects/openatc
It died a quiet death when no one showed up for the network field test
JW
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our and VATSIM/IVAO flying...
It's not a matter if it _should_ or not. The relevant details of the
protocol, at least as used by
Martin Spott wrote:
Vassilii Khachaturov wrote:
I wonder if the flightgear server though
should support the fsd protocol at some future point of time
to be a gateway between our and VATSIM/IVAO flying...
It's not a matter if it _should_ or not. The relevant details of the
On October 15, 2005 08:51 pm, David Luff wrote:
I know there was some talk of extracting taxiways from the FAA's PDFs,
I can't realistically see that happening!
That was a proposal from me. The idea is to have a program (could be a
modified version of KPDF) to read a vector based PDF file
On October 16, 2005 03:43 am, Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
I thought about the taxiway structure/format a while back.
I came to the conclusion that a raw polygon editor is about the only way
you're going to be able to create taxiways properly.
You mean, ac3d or blender ? No need to use a special
Regarding Robin's DB: having accurate taxiways is not the only concern. Some
other items that we should take notice of include:
- buildings placement
- gates' position
- tower/ILS frequencies
- runway/taxiway signs
- airport animations
- runway/taxiway conditions due to weather
- ground pathways
34 matches
Mail list logo
