Re: [Flightgear-devel] segfault at LFPG

Hi Tim, On Wednesday 27 August 2008 15:37:19 Tim Moore wrote: > > This is great! We can't call osgDB:SharedStateManager::share from the > database pager thread. I'll check in a fix soon. > Great to hear that this stack trace was useful. :-) Cheers, Durk -

[Flightgear-devel] Service update

This was way too long in coming, but I have done a few service updates. 1. The master ftp.*gear.org server was having stability problems for some time now and would crash every couple days. I never got to the bottom of the problem ... I fully replaced the motherboard, cpu, and memory at one point

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Service update

"Curtis Olson" wrote: > 3. I suspect I need to spend some time reviving the anonymous rsync server, > but I haven't had a chance to look into that yet. No one has complained > though so I assume it is not very popular and thus a lower priority. >From my point of view this is not the correct conc

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Service update

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > From my point of view this is not the correct conclusion. Instead, I > simply assume that it doesn't make any difference wether I complain or > not. So I remain looking at the regular error messages from the mirror > jobs a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Service update

"Curtis Olson" wrote: > When I researched the topic, I saw over and over again that the biggest > knock against git is that it does not have good support for windows. That > has been repeated on this list by more than just me. Yes, GIT has had pretty bad Windows support for a long time. Yes, I d

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Service update

Curtis Olson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > wrote: > > >From my point of view this is not the correct conclusion. Instead, I > simply assume that it doesn't make any difference wether I complain or > not. So I re

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Service update

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 11:38 AM, Martin Spott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > I repeat: You have not shown to have a point against introducing an > official (or 'authoritative') GIT mirror. Please explain to me what you > consider to be unprofessional about this claim ? I have never attempted to ma

Re: [Flightgear-devel] GIT

* Frederic Bouvier -- 8/27/2008 12:26 PM: > It is just that nobody explained me the benefits of using GIT over a > well known system such as CVS and SVN. I am aware of the serious lacks > of CVS, that's why I am advocating switching to SVN. Half of the fgfs developers are already using GIT for sg/

[Flightgear-devel] improving VOR indication (patch for navradio.cxx/hxx)

Here is a little patch that changes the behaviour of the VOR CDI and OFF-flag for indicators like the HSI when getting outside the range of the VOR station. Currently, when flying at a distance between the effective_range and twice the effective_range of a VOR station, the in-range property is

[Flightgear-devel] Re;Test

Hi, just checking if I got rid of the postmaster error. I keep getting my e-mails bounced back but no problem with receiving other's e-mails. I keep unsubscribing then subscribing, changing parameters etc. see what happens. I hope I can post something here I need your help people!---

Re: [Flightgear-devel] improving VOR indication (patch for navradio.cxx/hxx)

Hi Torsten, Does this patch work with any aircraft and nav radio, or do the individual aircraft need to be updated to match. I did a quick test in the default c172 flying from SJC to SFO, but the SFO 28R ILS seemed to have rock solid needle response even on the ground at SJC (26+ miles away) and

Re: [Flightgear-devel] improving VOR indication (patch for navradio.cxx/hxx)

On 28 Aug 2008, at 20:51, Curtis Olson wrote: > Does this patch work with any aircraft and nav radio, or do the > individual aircraft need to be updated to match. I did a quick test > in the default c172 flying from SJC to SFO, but the SFO 28R ILS > seemed to have rock solid needle respons

Re: [Flightgear-devel] improving VOR indication (patch for navradio.cxx/hxx)

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 3:03 PM, James Turner wrote: > I suspect there's lots of debate over decay functions - Torsten's > computation is cheap and seems reasonable, but I'll let people with > more aeronautical experience comment in detail. > > However, the use of random() in the existing code is

Re: [Flightgear-devel] f16 speedbrakes

Erik Hofman writes: > Ok, tested it again. The only way I could reproduce your scenario is > not to have the throttle near idle. > As I did state earlier, the speeedbrakes of the F-16 are quite small > and as it turns out the engine can easily produce enough thrust to > overcome the increased drag

Re: [Flightgear-devel] GIT

Melchior FRANZ wrote: > * Melchior FRANZ -- 8/26/2008 3:03 PM: >> But it would make me a bit nervous if an aircraft developer commits >> several pointless updates of 5MB sound files. GIT can't compress that. >> We'd collect the whole pile on our disks. How much would disk space >> requirements grow

Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Carrier with Aircraft, and the last JSBSim version

> With Catapult it is less a problem, with answering time > delay, i mean it should work. > Catapults features need only to know the "starting position" > with a more or less value precision: a carrier with 20 km > speed does 5.6 meter per second => 0.50 1/10 sec => 0.05 1/100 sec > > The

Re: [Flightgear-devel] improving VOR indication (patch for navradio.cxx/hxx)

> Hi Torsten, > > Does this patch work with any aircraft and nav radio, or do the individual > aircraft need to be updated to match. I did a quick test in the default > c172 flying from SJC to SFO, but the SFO 28R ILS seemed to have rock solid > needle response even on the ground at SJC (26+ miles