Sorry Erik
I don't want offend anyone here
But If I know that shaders will be used sometimes in fgfs I will work on
them but there are a lot of work to do and if anyone colud help me we can
work on it. So I propose this http://fgfs.narod.ru/glsl.tar.gz as framework
for using shaders in fgfs. What
On June 20, 2005 10:11 pm, Dave Culp wrote:
Here's some guy flying the River Visual to Runway 19 at DCA. This is a
19MB avi file. I'll leave this up for a couple days, then remove
it to put the hangar back up.
http://home.comcast.net/~davidculp2/dca_visual_19.AVI
Dave
You
On June 21, 2005 03:34 am, Roman Grigoriev wrote:
to Harald JOHNSEN:
spot lights in fgfs I had 3 years ago. they worked on vertex program and
registercombiners but everyone afraid of vertex programs and multitexturing
You can see some screens here http://fgfs.narod.ru
In my opinion, if the
Andy Ross wrote:
This is still bad, though. One would expect a version 1.1 API to
remain backwards compatible with the 1.0 API.
Look at PLIB, FlightGear depends on it as well and their policy is not
that much different,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its
Hi all,
I was working on interfacing flightgear with Simulink via UDP... I'm
happy to say that it worked :-) I used a matlab script file to read
and write data to transfer data to flightgear.
I was looking at the data that is being sent and I realized that of
all the engine data being sent,
Andy Ross wrote:
Alex Romosan wrote:
Dave Culp [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Just curious ... Is there any reason why OpenAl doesn't offer stable
releases?
probably because it's still under development? on their web page
(openal.org) they say they are migrating to openal 1.1 specifications.
as
Andy Ross wrote:
This is still bad, though. One would expect a version 1.1 API to
remain backwards compatible with the 1.0 API.
Oh, and it's not all bad. They are finally making the API compatible for
all supported platforms. Right now it differs at some places ...
Erik
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
Sorry Erik
I don't want offend anyone here
But If I know that shaders will be used sometimes in fgfs I will work on
them but there are a lot of work to do and if anyone colud help me we can
work on it. So I propose this http://fgfs.narod.ru/glsl.tar.gz as framework
for
- Original Message -
From: Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 11:56 AM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Lights was: Shadows
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
Sorry Erik
I don't want offend anyone
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
But I don't know about SGI - does this architecture support shaders at all?
So I think that if you add new classes to simgear people can start using
them and mekes things better.
SGI, ehm, well yes, sort of.
They invented the shaders, but only have a software (CPU)
Ok Ampere
I try to explain so forgive me to my bad english
Lets start from simple For example about runway lights
http://fgfs.narod.ru/glsl.tar.gz
I think that its' not good to use sphere mapping for runway lights points to
calculate visibility and have using triangles instead points. - so you
- Original Message -
From: Erik Hofman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 12:35 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Lights was: Shadows
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
But I don't know about SGI - does this
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
[...] because you can specify shaders that can be loaded to NV only or
ATI only and during fgfs startup we can detect archtecture and load proper
shader. for example using NV shaders on NV hardware can get 20% boost to
framerate.
and detection of hardware is so easy
- Original Message -
From: Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Newsgroups: list.flightgear-devel
To: flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Lights was: Shadows
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
[...] because you can specify shaders
I got the following error while doing make:
FGNozzle.cpp: In method 'JSBSim::FGNozzle(JSBSim::FGFDMExec *,
JSBSim::FGConfigFile *, int =0)':
FGNozzle.cpp:74: implicit declaration of function 'int JSBSim::snprintf(..)'
Thanks in advance,
-
This
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
We can simply use ARB extension - that support on ATI and NV but if you want
get some boost knowing some aspects of architecture sometimes up to 30% you
can simple use vendor specific extentions.
I simply fear exactly such proceeding this will manouvre FG into (a)
Martin Spott
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
We can simply use ARB extension - that support on ATI and NV but if you
want
get some boost knowing some aspects of architecture sometimes up to 30%
you
can simple use vendor specific extentions.
I simply fear exactly such proceeding this will
In a message dated 6/22/2005 3:53:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What do you guys think?
I think you should share the specifics of the UDP and Matlab version with
those of us that have been toying with this unsucessfully for months... ;^)
Mike
bass pumped wrote:
Hi all,
I was working on interfacing flightgear with Simulink via UDP... I'm
happy to say that it worked :-) I used a matlab script file to read
and write data to transfer data to flightgear.
I was looking at the data that is being sent and I realized that of
all the
The joysticks and default keyboard bindings do no longer set the gear/flap
properties directly, but both use wrapper functions in controls.nas. The
flaps did this since a while, but behave differently now: The bindings don't
only report flaps/gear up/down, but also when the button was released.
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
To make the gear only move while g/G is pressed (or the gear buttons
on the js), and immediately stop movement on release, define for example this
in, let's say b29.nas:
Sweet.
Josh
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Melchior FRANZ wrote:
The joysticks and default keyboard bindings do no longer set the gear/flap
properties directly, but both use wrapper functions in controls.nas. The
flaps did this since a while, [...]
Do I feel correctly that this is true also for the throttle ? This
might explain why I
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:03 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
The joysticks and default keyboard bindings do no longer set the gear/flap
properties directly, but both use wrapper functions in controls.nas. The
flaps did this since a while, but behave differently now: The bindings don't
only
-Original Message-
From: Gerard ROBIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 1:50 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Main Airports Conflict
withGraphic Card6600GT !!!
The hardware is able to do it, with the old driver 6229
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 09:49 -0500, Alberico, James F a écrit :
-Original Message-
From: Gerard ROBIN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2005 1:50 PM
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Main Airports Conflict
withGraphic
Alberico, James F wrote:
For what it's worth, additional info on this thread:
I saw the same bad performance on an Fx 3400 with new driver. I was not
able to find any properties or run options to alleviate the problem (10
fps or less, when looking at an airfield -- running with enhanced
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 10:25 -0500, Curtis L. Olson a écrit :
Alberico, James F wrote:
For what it's worth, additional info on this thread:
I saw the same bad performance on an Fx 3400 with new driver. I was not
able to find any properties or run options to alleviate the problem (10
Hi Steve,
UTM33N is indeed a coordinate system, probably the system of choice for
use in Italy, most of the country being in the 33rd 6-degree wide strip
of the planet, and in the northern hemisphere:
I agree.
WGS84 is also a coordinate system - the native system used by GPS and
(unless
Martin Spott wrote:
Andy Ross wrote:
If someone can set me up with ssh access to a shell account (no need
to run the whole fgfs binary) on a Mac or SGI or whatnot, let me
know. :)
I could offer an account on an UltraSparc with GCC,
As long as the compiler generates 32 bit executables
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:44 +0200, Gerard Robin a écrit :
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:03 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
The joysticks and default keyboard bindings do no longer set the gear/flap
properties directly, but both use wrapper functions in controls.nas. The
flaps did this
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 16:44:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:03 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
The default controls functions ignore this additional information and
should
exactly behave as before.
If i need to keep the old process, what
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 18:44 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 16:44:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:03 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
The default controls functions ignore this additional information and
should
exactly behave as before.
Gerard Robin wrote:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 09:49 -0500, Alberico, James F a écrit :
The hardware is able to do it, with the old driver 6229 it can.
But the average performance is less, because that driver
does not suit to these new GPU with GPL 2. May be a bug in
the last NVIDIA
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 18:50 +0200, Harald JOHNSEN a écrit :
Gerard Robin wrote:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 09:49 -0500, Alberico, James F a écrit :
The hardware is able to do it, with the old driver 6229 it can.
But the average performance is less, because that driver
does
Throttle position is definitely included in the net_ctrls.hxx
structure. What structure are you using for your matlab communication?
Curt.
yup!!! it is there in native_ctrls. I just thought it might be a
good idea to have it in native_fdm too!! Just a thought!!!
I think you should share the specifics of the UDP and Matlab version with
those of us that have been toying with this unsucessfully for months... ;^)
Matlab 7 it is. I used the TCP/UDP/IP toolbox by Peter Rydesäter.
You can find it at
bass pumped wrote:
Throttle position is definitely included in the net_ctrls.hxx
structure. What structure are you using for your matlab communication?
Curt.
yup!!! it is there in native_ctrls. I just thought it might be a
good idea to have it in native_fdm too!! Just a thought!!!
ok... I have a question. I want to send a commanded elevator control
surface deflection instead of a stick command to flightgear from
matlab. This means that I cannot use native_ctrls but instead have to
use native_fdm where an option to edit this value does exist. But how
will I be able to
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 18:46:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 16:44 +0200, Gerard Robin a écrit :
If i need to keep the old process, what must be done on my side ?
In addition to my previous question which is waiting for an answer.
I thought I had answered that by underlining
bass pumped wrote:
ok... I have a question. I want to send a commanded elevator control
surface deflection instead of a stick command to flightgear from
matlab. This means that I cannot use native_ctrls but instead have to
use native_fdm where an option to edit this value does exist. But
* Melchior FRANZ -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 19:44:
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 18:46:
Is it any consequence when using interpolation ?
No.
Oh, you mean the XML interpolation. That is even less concerned ...
m.
___
Flightgear-devel
Roman Grigoriev wrote:
I would like to add support for them, just in the proper way. That's why
it is still in my TODO box. It's just the time ...
Here are a few things to consider:
1. Move the Shader class over to a new file (probably shader.cxx and
shader.hxx) in
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:51:01 -0500, bass wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hi all,
I'm sending joystick input through Simulink in Matlab to Flightgear
using the Native-ctrls structure. I am able to control everything
pretty satisfactorily, everything except the throttle... its gone
..this is the correct behavior for early WWI era planes powered with
rotary engines such as the Gnome, Rhone and Oberursel rotaries,
these were throttled by blipping the ignition off-n-on to cut power
to a desirable level. If you're _not_ doing a rotary, it's a bug. ;o)
I know I'm not
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 19:54 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
* Melchior FRANZ -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 19:44:
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 18:46:
Is it any consequence when using interpolation ?
No.
Oh, you mean the XML interpolation. That is even less concerned
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 20:54:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 19:54 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
Oh, you mean the XML interpolation. That is even less concerned ...
Thank, that is i hoped to ear .
I don't even know why I answered such a nonsense question. How realistic
is it
Melchior
And this is by no means innovative. Andy had done this for several
control functions already. Just a few were/are missing. What is new
is the fact that the default bindings for gear and flaps do now also
report key/button release. This is required for gear/flaps without
defined
If I were you, I'd take a look at net_fdm.h and native_fdm.c. The
data structure received by FlightGear can easily be modified to
include whichever parameters you'd like to control from your Matlab
sim. You just need to add code to set the appropriate FlightGear
properties.
It doesn't make
On 6/22/05, Drew [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I were you, I'd take a look at net_fdm.h and native_fdm.c. The
data structure received by FlightGear can easily be modified to
include whichever parameters you'd like to control from your Matlab
sim. You just need to add code to set the
BEFORE:
kbd binding--\
| property
js binding---/
NOW (and since a while for flaps and many others):
kbd binding\
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 21:21 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
* Gerard Robin -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 20:54:
Le mercredi 22 juin 2005 à 19:54 +0200, Melchior FRANZ a écrit :
Oh, you mean the XML interpolation. That is even less concerned ...
Thank, that is i hoped to ear .
I
* Giles Robertson -- Wednesday 22 June 2005 21:58:
If this were extended to all controls, then it could be used as an
abstraction for key bindings,
Except that only a part of the bindings is Nasal-based.
which would allow us to deal with the kb
localisation issues that were mentioned
Hello,
will anyone - besides me - attend the LinuxTag this thursday ?
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--
___
Flightgear-devel
Hi,
I am trying to go to 0version 0.9.8
I typed make and I got the following error:
FGNozzle.cpp: In method 'JSBSim::FGNozzle(JSBSim::FGFDMExec *,
JSBSim::FGConfigFile *, int =0)':
FGNozzle.cpp:74: implicit declaration of function 'int
JSBSim::snprintf(..)'
Does someone knows what
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I typed make and I got the following error:
FGNozzle.cpp: In method 'JSBSim::FGNozzle(JSBSim::FGFDMExec *,
JSBSim::FGConfigFile *, int =0)':
FGNozzle.cpp:74: implicit declaration of function 'int
JSBSim::snprintf(..)'
Does someone knows what is wrong?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I typed make and I got the following error:
FGNozzle.cpp: In method 'JSBSim::FGNozzle(JSBSim::FGFDMExec *,
JSBSim::FGConfigFile *, int =0)':
FGNozzle.cpp:74: implicit declaration of function 'int
JSBSim::snprintf(..)'
Does someone knows what is
On Mittwoch 22 Juni 2005 23:26, Martin Spott wrote:
Hello,
will anyone - besides me - attend the LinuxTag this thursday ?
I will be there at Friday.
I guess I will be at the stand of my company science + computing (together
with HP and Novell).
Greetings
Mathias
--
Mathias
On Freitag 17 Juni 2005 21:02, Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
I have started to add some volumetric shadows in Flightgear.
It uses the standard stencil method to count shadow volume (let me know
if you want an implementation
without stencil, it can also be done with the alpha buffer).
A few days ago I
58 matches
Mail list logo
