Re: [Flightgear-devel] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread Martin Dressler
Hi,
I have some question.

I'm missing spin property in attitude-indicator property list. It isn't there?

I also want to ask if it is possible visualize hotspots, I remember that I 
read some plans about it.

Thanks,
Madr


-- 
  Martin Dressler

e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.musicabona.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Engines on c310

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Jim Wilson writes:

  :-)  BTW the menu work is looking great!

Thanks -- feel free to try your hand at a dialog or two.  This is a
good time for experimentation.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Martin Dressler writes:

  I'm missing spin property in attitude-indicator property list. It
  isn't there?

It's showing up for me.  Do you have the latest CVS code?


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



[Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread Martin Spott
 I believe something has to be fixed before:

http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/FGFS/Building_01.png


Do you know how you get there ? This happens when you try taxiing below the
airport building  :-))
I suppose this should be changed before you start offering bridges to the
people - the tempation to fly below the Golden Gate is too big and how
you tell the people why their plane crashes every time   ;-)

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] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Alex Perry writes:

  In any case, I'll try to give the instruments a careful flight
  testing.

Thanks.  Please look especially carefully at the magnetic compass -- I
tried to copy your algorithm, but I'm not sure that all the
acceleration and turning errors made it through.

  It's now up to y'all that fly non-C172 aircraft to make more
  instruments.

Note that I'm modelling instruments logically.  For example, the turn
coordinator is actually two separate instruments, a turn gyro and a
slip-skid ball, so each of those has its own C++ module.  Some of the
higher-end instruments such as the HSI and RMI are simply combinations
of simpler functions, though some day we will actually want to model
the slaved unit for the HSI instead of just giving the actual magnetic
heading reliably; others, like IFR GPS's and glass cockpits, will
require a lot of custom coding, and I'm wondering if we should wait
until scripting support stabilizes.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



[Flightgear-devel] Partially Offtopic: Help open up the FSD protocol

2003-01-27 Thread Mathew McBride
 Hi,

In my ongoing quest to implement a FSD (protocol used in SquakBox) client
for FlightGear, I've read the Protocol Info document located at
http://www.simclients.com/ProtoDev-InfoForProspectiveDevelopers.doc (word
document, 103 kb) and at page 2 section 4 it reads:

The group is protected by an agreement, made between each developer and the
group (as a whole) which prevents disclosure of privileged communications.
This allows members of the group to discuss network sensitive issues, or
share source code, within the group with a guarantee of security.  The
agreement allows open development between genuine developers, whilst
protecting the network and users from trojan software and troublesome
developers.. (I take troublesome developers as an Insult, not because I
am pretty much an Ameteur, but it makes it look like a 'special club', (it
is))

Basically they are making this protocol proprietary so no one can develop
crap clients.

The agreement has a 25-year lifespan. (thats a _long_ time when you talk
about FGFS).

I wish to send a joint letter (on behalf on the FGFS community and me) to
the ProtoDev Development group as a request to open up the FSD protocol.
What are they talking about security. Hey, anyone can get access to the
protocol docs of the MSN, ICQ and (especially) Jabber IM networks, and to a
whole lot more protocols.

I have no idea of who is in the Protocol development group (thus persuading
a motion to open the protocol is hard), but I am aware of 2 members:

VATSIM Representative James Willan ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
SimClients Liaison  Steve Groner ([EMAIL PROTECTED])


If this fails, I will either :
a) reverse engineer the protocol. Considering trying to block any clients I
develop based on my work will be hard
b) create a brand new one.


I wish to collect as many views and names I can. DO NOT send messenges
personally to the representatives above. Send them to my address with [FSD
petition] somewhere in the subject line.

Remember: FlightGear has no agent to communicate with other Flight Sim's. If
we developed a FSD client, I _swear_ some interest will come to FlightGear.
--
Mathew McBride
[EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Engines on c310

2003-01-27 Thread Curtis L. Olson
David Megginson writes:
 Jim Wilson writes:
 
   :-)  BTW the menu work is looking great!
 
 Thanks -- feel free to try your hand at a dialog or two.  This is a
 good time for experimentation.

David,

From very brief look, the File-Reset function does not appear
to be functional.

Also, the presets dialog doesn't appear to do anything when you click
ok or apply.

It's great to see some of the failures being exposed through the gui.

Regards,

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program   FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minnesota  http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



RE: [Flightgear-devel] Partially Offtopic: Help open up the FSD protocol

2003-01-27 Thread Michael Basler
Mathew,

 The group is protected by an agreement, made between each
 developer and the
 group (as a whole) which prevents disclosure of privileged communications.

Neither my flying skills nor my spare time are sufficient for taking part in
Vatsim :-(

However, I know that there are a few competiting networks a la Vatsim
present or just emerging and I read several quite sharp debates (from
various parties) about stealing ideas, data, members from each other in
Newsgroups right now (instead of sharing services, members, controllers...).

While Vatsim certainly is a cool service with a huge member base and the
idea seems to be intriguing, I don't think this is the envirenment we want
for FG, isn't it?

If you can do it, I'd propose developing our own (albeit small) service. If
not more, than just a few controllers around KSFO as a proof of concept.

Regards, Michael

--
Michael Basler, Jena, Germany
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
  http://www.geocities.com/pmb.geo/


___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread Martin Dressler
On Mon 27. January 2003 13:40, you wrote:
 Martin Dressler writes:
   I'm missing spin property in attitude-indicator property list. It
   isn't there?

 It's showing up for me.  Do you have the latest CVS code?


 All the best,


 David

Hmmm, It is there, but I'm still missing it in coments in .hxx file

And what about action hot-spots visualization?

Thank,
Madr

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread Curtis L. Olson
Martin Dressler writes:
 On Mon 27. January 2003 13:40, you wrote:
  Martin Dressler writes:
I'm missing spin property in attitude-indicator property list. It
isn't there?
 
  It's showing up for me.  Do you have the latest CVS code?
 
 
  All the best,
 
 
  David
 
 Hmmm, It is there, but I'm still missing it in coments in .hxx file
 
 And what about action hot-spots visualization?

Martin,

Typing Ctrl-C will toggle hot spots on and off.  This appears to work
in both 2d and 3d panels.

Regards,

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program   FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minnesota  http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Partially Offtopic: Help open up the FSD protocol

2003-01-27 Thread James Turner

On Monday, January 27, 2003, at 01:27  pm, Michael Basler wrote:


Neither my flying skills nor my spare time are sufficient for taking 
part in
Vatsim :-(

Me too ...



However, I know that there are a few competiting networks a la Vatsim
present or just emerging and I read several quite sharp debates (from
various parties) about stealing ideas, data, members from each other 
in
Newsgroups right now (instead of sharing services, members, 
controllers...).

There's also IVAO? which is a different group but uses the same software


If you can do it, I'd propose developing our own (albeit small) 
service. If
not more, than just a few controllers around KSFO as a proof of 
concept.

The problem will all these system, as I see it, is the lack of people 
willing to control. What I think would work much better is a web of 
servers, but with the ATC manned by AIs. Of course in the long run 
people could write a controller client and take over from the AI at a 
position, but basically the system could function happily without any 
human controllers. Now, writing those ATC AIs is non-trivial, but it's 
something that's in the pipe-line anyway.

This also suggest a 'Quake-like' approach for local traffic and ATC : 
simply start a local server running the ATC ai and some plane AIs, and 
connect the main program to it over loopback. (Quake-like as in this is 
how every modern first-person shooter based on Quake or Unreal is set 
up. Bots on the server are indiscernible from other live players, and 
single-player works as expected, but is in fact running a server too).

Comments?
HH
James

--
The lack of planning on your part does not constitute to an emergency 
on mine



___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel


Re: [Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread Norman Vine
Martin Spott writes:

  I believe something has to be fixed before:
 
 http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/FGFS/Building_01.png
 
 
 Do you know how you get there ? This happens when you try taxiing below the
 airport building  :-))
 I suppose this should be changed before you start offering bridges to the
 people - the tempation to fly below the Golden Gate is too big and how
 you tell the people why their plane crashes every time   ;-)

1)  Don't know why there is a large unrendered area 

2) The ground intersector was changed to report maximum elevation at a point
 of any object under the Terrain Root Node so as to support landing on aircraft 
 carriers. Things like Bridges, Hangers and other objects that don't want to 
exhibit 
 this behavior will need to have a separate SSG Root or be a 'special' ssgNode type
 so that their surfaces will be skipped when doing HOT calculations.

3) What is really needed for flying under bridges is a general purpose 3D collision 
detection support which the scenery hitlist routine is not.  It is only designed 
to 
report the height of the highest point at the location of the intersection with 
the terrrain 
scenegraph in the direction specified by the 'look from point' and the 'look in 
direction'
vector. Obviously this builds invisible walls between surfaces if there is more 
then one 
surface at a point, such as under a bridge.  I think that this behavior can be 
reverted
so as to again only report the distance to 'front side' faces under the 'looked 
from point'
but this will break being able to land on an aircraft carrier and will allow one 
to fly thru
solid objects.

Cheers

Norman
 
  
  



___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



re: [Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Martin Spott writes:
   I believe something has to be fixed before:
  
  http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/FGFS/Building_01.png
  
  
  Do you know how you get there ? This happens when you try taxiing below the
  airport building  :-))

Yes, I've noticed the same thing.  I thought that we had things set up
now so that you could taxi under objects -- I know that I can taxi
inside a hangar building under the roof -- so I don't know why I
cannot taxi under the KSFO International Terminal (other than the fact
that it's full of cars in real life).


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Engines on c310

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Curtis L. Olson writes:

  Also, the presets dialog doesn't appear to do anything when you click
  ok or apply.

OK and apply copy the values from the dialog to the presets; they do
not apply the presets.  We probably need to make that more intuitive.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] End of /steam approaches

2003-01-27 Thread Martin Dressler
Thanks

Only one small note to David. Shouldn't be gui directory in base package 
named Gui. All other directories start with capital letter.

Madr

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread Curtis L. Olson
Norman Vine writes:
 3) What is really needed for flying under bridges is a general
 purpose 3D collision detection support which the scenery hitlist
 routine is not.  It is only designed to report the height of the
 highest point at the location of the intersection with the terrrain
 scenegraph in the direction specified by the 'look from point' and
 the 'look in direction' vector. Obviously this builds invisible
 walls between surfaces if there is more then one surface at a point,
 such as under a bridge.  I think that this behavior can be reverted
 so as to again only report the distance to 'front side' faces under
 the 'looked from point' but this will break being able to land on an
 aircraft carrier and will allow one to fly thru solid objects.

In many of the higher end commercial sims they build invisible walls
underneath bridges to discourage illegal or unwise behavior ... :-)

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program   FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minnesota  http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Partially Offtopic: Help open up the FSDprotocol

2003-01-27 Thread Arnt Karlsen
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:28:38 +1100, 
Mathew McBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 
01c2c604$edb005a0$390a32d2@m7r4m2:

  Basically they are making this protocol proprietary so no one can
  develop crap clients.

...and in the process, _junks_ any and all open source licensed crap 
linux and unix developers experience and skill and codebase, for good.

  I wish to send a joint letter (on behalf on the FGFS community and
  me) to the ProtoDev Development group as a request to open up the FSD
  protocol. What are they talking about security. Hey, anyone can get
  access to the protocol docs of the MSN, ICQ and (especially) Jabber
  IM networks, and to a whole lot more protocols.

..uhmmm, agreed, however _also_ chk each document's license terms, 
some _are_ draconian.  ;-)

  If this fails, I will either :
  a) reverse engineer the protocol. Considering trying to block any
  clients I develop based on my work will be hard
  b) create a brand new one.

..I like b), harder to prove it as pirated, if it _aint_.  ;-)

  I wish to collect as many views and names I can. DO NOT send
  messenges personally to the representatives above. Send them to my
  address with [FSD petition] somewhere in the subject line.

..futile if you wanna keep this an unrecorded secret, reasonable and
right if you wanna win them over to the open source way of doing things.
FG mail list archives are available online to prove it.

  Remember: FlightGear has no agent to communicate with other Flight

..no?  ;-)
http://dsc.discovery.com/anthology/unsolvedhistory/redbaron/redbaron.html

  Sim's. If we developed a FSD client, I _swear_ some interest will
  come to FlightGear.

..amen!

-- 
..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] Engines on c310

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Curtis L. Olson writes:

  Is there any mechanism yet to apply the presets?  I haven't been
  able to find it.

Yes, the big button at the top that says Revert to Defaults (since
we're setting default values).  Please feel free to play around with
the dialog to make it more intuitive.

  Also when I try to select File-Reset I get No command attached
  to binding

That was a typo in menubar.cxx -- I've just checked in a fix.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread Norman Vine
Martin Spott writes:
 
   I believe something has to be fixed before:
  
  http://document.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/bitmap/FGFS/Building_01.png
 [...]
  1)  Don't know why there is a large unrendered area 
 
 What you're calling 'unrendered area' is supposed to be the untextured roof
 of the new terminal building at KSFO.

Ah ...

FWIW
Then assuming the 'reference point' is at the 'geometrical center' of this 
model, it appears as if you crashed when the 'ref pt'  got into the 'building'

This is the expected behaviour of the terrain intersector since at this
point the terrain intersector says that the model is underground :-)

Cheers

Norman

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] status of networking / multiplayer

2003-01-27 Thread Richard Airlie
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 02:17:05PM -0800, ace project wrote:
 Well, the engine I'm building is designed to be as
 non-intrusive as possible (it loads as a FGSubsystem,
 so only a entry in main.cpp is needed and it starts up
 only if it sees a entry in the properties list when
 the Flight Gear starts).
 
 I've heard that Dave is also working on a engine and
 that there is a 3rd person trying to build one (link
 was fg-server.sourceforge.net if I remember correctly)
 
 For as far as I know, every engine is build 100%
 independable of each other at this time, but I
 think/hope that the engine will come together in some
 common interface at the end.

Hi and thanks for the info. I was kind of expecting there to be a coordinated
effort to add multiplayer support to FlightGear, with various tasks on the
table and regular commits so everyone could see what was going on. From what
you've said it sounds like various multiplayer engines are being developed in
isolation and provided as patches, with the aim of one day being incorporated
into the main tree. Not to say that there is anything wrong in this way of
working, of course :) It does however explain why there isn't even a very
basic multiplayer support in FlightGear ATM, as until something substantial
is written, nothing will be comitted to the tree. (right?)

I downloaded the multiplayer stuff from your site but haven't had a look at
it yet. Any idea when you'll be releasing a fully working version to play with?

thanks again,
Richard.

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Engines on c310

2003-01-27 Thread Curtis L. Olson
David Megginson writes:
 Curtis L. Olson writes:
 Yes, the big button at the top that says Revert to Defaults (since
 we're setting default values).  Please feel free to play around with
 the dialog to make it more intuitive.

Ok, will do ...

   Also when I try to select File-Reset I get No command attached
   to binding
 
 That was a typo in menubar.cxx -- I've just checked in a fix.

Ok, thanks, glad it was something simple.

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program   FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minnesota  http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] status of networking / multiplayer

2003-01-27 Thread ace project
..

 Hi and thanks for the info. I was kind of expecting
 there to be a coordinated
 effort to add multiplayer support to FlightGear,
 with various tasks on the
 table and regular commits so everyone could see what
 was going on. From what
 you've said it sounds like various multiplayer
 engines are being developed in
 isolation and provided as patches, with the aim of
 one day being incorporated
 into the main tree. Not to say that there is
 anything wrong in this way of
 working, of course :) It does however explain why
 there isn't even a very
 basic multiplayer support in FlightGear ATM, as
 until something substantial
 is written, nothing will be comitted to the tree.
 (right?)
 
 I downloaded the multiplayer stuff from your site
 but haven't had a look at
 it yet. Any idea when you'll be releasing a fully
 working version to play with?
 
 thanks again,
 Richard.
 
Well, I'm working at it. It started in June2002 as a
full time school project, but then in the end I missed
the computer power (==graphics cards) to test the code
I wrote. So I put most of the time in making it
portable. I achieved platform (solaris/linux/cygwin)
and endian portablity.

But now I'm back to full time school (first day at
university, (starting at 3rd grade) :) ) so I don't
know what time I can spend on updating the code.

But I do what I can. Next test version might be ready
as early as begin next week, but no promises ! I'll
post it when is ready for testing


Leon Otte


=
My Flight Gear Multiplayer Stuff (work-in-progress):
http://www.kbs.twi.tudelft.nl/People/Students/L.Otte/

OK, I admit it: My girlfriend's just an object to me. 
Unfortunately, there is some information hiding, but 
thankfully, she's fairly encapsulated, nicely modular, and 
has a very well defined interface!

__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread Arnt Karlsen
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:00:40 -0600, 
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:

 In many of the higher end commercial sims they build invisible walls
 underneath bridges to discourage illegal or unwise behavior ... :-)
 
 Curt.

...which would warrant both runtime and compile time options like
--build-invisible-walls-under-bridges, and --tip-fbi...  ;-)

-- 
..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] When talking about bridges ....

2003-01-27 Thread David Megginson
Arnt Karlsen writes:

  ...which would warrant both runtime and compile time options like
  --build-invisible-walls-under-bridges, and --tip-fbi...  ;-)

I'd prefer --tip-interpol: after all, this is an international
project.

Sometimes there are legitimate reasons to fly under something -- not
that often, but sometimes: for example, a helicopter doing a low-level
hydrographic survey might pass under a very high bridge, as might a
helicopter on approach to a shoreline helipad.  There is no reason at
all that a seaplane shouldn't water-taxi under a bridge.


All the best,


David

-- 
David Megginson, [EMAIL PROTECTED], http://www.megginson.com/

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] to compile jsbsim with MSVC

2003-01-27 Thread Frederic Bouvier
JSBsim as today in CVS doesn't compile with MSVC 7. Classes FGTurboJet,
FGTurboProp, FGTurboShaft are not in the JSBsim namespace. I don't know
if it is intended. If yes, there is a need for a 'using namespace JSBSim;'
directive. In addition, the map in FGSwitch doesn't compile with const,
that is totally useless in that case.

A patch follow

Cheers,

-Fred

D:\FlightGear\cvs\FlightGear\src\FDM\JSBSimcvs -z3 -q diff -u
Index: FGTurboJet.h
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboJet.h,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboJet.h
--- FGTurboJet.h10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
+++ FGTurboJet.h27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@
 CLASS DECLARATION


%%*/

+using namespace JSBSim;
+
 class FGTurboJet : public FGEngine
 {
 public:
Index: FGTurboProp.h
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboProp.h,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboProp.h
--- FGTurboProp.h   10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
+++ FGTurboProp.h   27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
@@ -51,6 +51,8 @@
 CLASS DECLARATION


%%*/

+using namespace JSBSim;
+
 class FGTurboProp : public FGEngine
 {
 public:
Index: FGTurboShaft.h
===
RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboShaft.h,v
retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboShaft.h
--- FGTurboShaft.h  10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
+++ FGTurboShaft.h  27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
@@ -47,6 +47,8 @@

 #define ID_TURBOSHAFT $Id: FGTurboShaft.h,v 1.1.1.1 2002/09/10 01:14:00
curt Exp $

+using namespace JSBSim;
+

/*%%

 CLASS DECLARATION


%%*/
Index: filtersjb/FGSwitch.h
===
RCS file:
/var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/filtersjb/FGSwitch.h,v
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -r1.2 FGSwitch.h
--- filtersjb/FGSwitch.h24 Jan 2003 12:55:31 -  1.2
+++ filtersjb/FGSwitch.h27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
@@ -119,7 +119,7 @@

   enum eLogic {elUndef=0, eAND, eOR, eDefault};
   enum eComparison {ecUndef=0, eEQ, eNE, eGT, eGE, eLT, eLE};
-  map const string, eComparison mComparison;
+  map string, eComparison mComparison;

   struct test {
 vector FGCondition conditions;



___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] [PATCH] to compile jsbsim with MSVC

2003-01-27 Thread Tony Peden
On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 12:27, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
 JSBsim as today in CVS doesn't compile with MSVC 7. Classes FGTurboJet,
 FGTurboProp, FGTurboShaft 

These can be removed from the project.  They should not be in FG cvs and
I will remove them shortly.


 are not in the JSBsim namespace. I don't know
 if it is intended. If yes, there is a need for a 'using namespace JSBSim;'
 directive. In addition, the map in FGSwitch doesn't compile with const,
 that is totally useless in that case.
 
 A patch follow
 
 Cheers,
 
 -Fred
 
 D:\FlightGear\cvs\FlightGear\src\FDM\JSBSimcvs -z3 -q diff -u
 Index: FGTurboJet.h
 ===
 RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboJet.h,v
 retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
 diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboJet.h
 --- FGTurboJet.h10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
 +++ FGTurboJet.h27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
 @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@
  CLASS DECLARATION
 
 
 %%*/
 
 +using namespace JSBSim;
 +
  class FGTurboJet : public FGEngine
  {
  public:
 Index: FGTurboProp.h
 ===
 RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboProp.h,v
 retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
 diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboProp.h
 --- FGTurboProp.h   10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
 +++ FGTurboProp.h   27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
 @@ -51,6 +51,8 @@
  CLASS DECLARATION
 
 
 %%*/
 
 +using namespace JSBSim;
 +
  class FGTurboProp : public FGEngine
  {
  public:
 Index: FGTurboShaft.h
 ===
 RCS file: /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/FGTurboShaft.h,v
 retrieving revision 1.1.1.1
 diff -u -r1.1.1.1 FGTurboShaft.h
 --- FGTurboShaft.h  10 Sep 2002 01:14:00 -  1.1.1.1
 +++ FGTurboShaft.h  27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
 @@ -47,6 +47,8 @@
 
  #define ID_TURBOSHAFT $Id: FGTurboShaft.h,v 1.1.1.1 2002/09/10 01:14:00
 curt Exp $
 
 +using namespace JSBSim;
 +
 
 /*%%
 
  CLASS DECLARATION
 
 
 %%*/
 Index: filtersjb/FGSwitch.h
 ===
 RCS file:
 /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/FlightGear/src/FDM/JSBSim/filtersjb/FGSwitch.h,v
 retrieving revision 1.2
 diff -u -r1.2 FGSwitch.h
 --- filtersjb/FGSwitch.h24 Jan 2003 12:55:31 -  1.2
 +++ filtersjb/FGSwitch.h27 Jan 2003 20:25:22 -
 @@ -119,7 +119,7 @@
 
enum eLogic {elUndef=0, eAND, eOR, eDefault};
enum eComparison {ecUndef=0, eEQ, eNE, eGT, eGE, eLT, eLE};
 -  map const string, eComparison mComparison;
 +  map string, eComparison mComparison;
 
struct test {
  vector FGCondition conditions;
 
 
 
 ___
 Flightgear-devel mailing list
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
-- 
Tony Peden [EMAIL PROTECTED]


___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel



Re: [Flightgear-devel] Remote root exploit found in CVS

2003-01-27 Thread Curtis L. Olson
Brandon Bergren writes:
 Jim Wilson wrote:
  Root?  I doubt it.  Although, I suppose it _will_ run under root just like
  anything else ;-)
  
  Best,
  
  Jim
 
 Moments later, the well-crafted exploit hits the end of the buffer and 
 makes the jump to kernel space.
 
 (reminds me of Unix Wars ;)

I've got one machine that no one will ever crack.  It's currently
powered off, never had a net connection, and buried 2 miles under the
surface of the earth in solid concrete.  See, there it is, all safe
and sou... hey, what the ... ?!?

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson   IVLab / HumanFIRST Program   FlightGear Project
Twin Cities[EMAIL PROTECTED]  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Minnesota  http://www.menet.umn.edu/~curt   http://www.flightgear.org

___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel