Hi Martin,
Martin Spott a écrit :
Hi Frederic,
you wrote:
in case someone care, here is what I am doing for about a year :
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/yafseng_2.avi [Xvid, 7.698kb]
Do you plan/intend to compete with ossimPlanet here or do you have a
different aim ? I'm not sure
On jeudi 02 octobre 2008, Martin Spott wrote:
Another re-send excuse to all, who get this twice.
Heiko Schulz wrote:
Well, was this really the cause that the skilled developers [...] and
a lot more disappeared?
You'll certainly excuse that I won't cite names here. Nevertheless I
Hi,
srtm4 is a height field. there is a special value for sea
level, but
that's all. From what I understand of the problem with
current scenery,
it is less a data problem than a bug in the triangulator.
Having worked
on fgsd for several years, I know that these issues are
tough to
Hi,
So, I'd much rather see a concerted effort to get CVS
into a
releasable state, and a schedule for some 'preview'
or 'beta'
releases, rather than working on back-ports.
James
I agree to nearly all what you said, but why not release an official
2.0-pre-version with OSG which
[resending again]
- gerard robin a écrit :
SRTM is about ground elevation. Coastline is a
different topic and experience has shown that all these nice attempts
to automagically derive coastlines from imagery, be it SWBD or PGS,
return pretty flaky results. Unfortunately
Well,
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
The algorithm I am trying to implement doesn't use triangle to define
landuse. Instead, the earth surface is divided into squares of different
size ( there are currently 16 lod, there will be 20 with srtm ), and each
square has its own texture. The mesh is a regular,
On 3 Oct 2008, at 13:15, Heiko Schulz wrote:
I agree to nearly all what you said, but why not release an official
2.0-pre-version with OSG which shows to the world that we are still
alive? Maybe as an advertisement to other developers?
Yep, that's what I said :)
In the moment I see
I would be pleased to get something formal released.
A snapshot would mean publicity through Phoronix - to the Linux crowd,
inclusion in the Phoronix Test Suite (for multi-display testing), and
finally AMD would squeeze out a few videos of Tim Moore's great multi
camera at least 12 heads (16 if I
Martin Spott a écrit :
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
The algorithm I am trying to implement doesn't use triangle to
define
landuse. Instead, the earth surface is divided into squares of
different
size ( there are currently 16 lod, there will be 20 with srtm ), and
each
square has its own
James Turner wrote:
On 3 Oct 2008, at 13:15, Heiko Schulz wrote:
I agree to nearly all what you said, but why not release an official
2.0-pre-version with OSG which shows to the world that we are still
alive? Maybe as an advertisement to other developers?
Yep, that's what I said :)
I
On 3 Oct 2008, at 13:48, Matthew Tippett wrote:
Speaking of which, another call out for multithreading... The GPU
isn't the limiting factor in our tests, the CPU is. Even mid-low end
systems have 2-4 cores these days, and with the multi-display demo we
are continually capped by one CPU.
I
Are there any short term targets that will show benefit?
Regards,
Matthew
Original Message
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] multi-threading / CPU usage
From: James Turner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions
flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Date:
On 3 Oct 2008, at 15:14, Matthew Tippett wrote:
Are there any short term targets that will show benefit?
That's a question best answered by profiling and measurement, since
people are notoriously bad at guessing such things.
The 'Nasal on a helper thread' thing may be possible in the short
On vendredi 03 octobre 2008, James Turner wrote:
On 3 Oct 2008, at 11:50, gerard robin wrote:
We (I) must be patient, and still wait a long time before to get
within FG
most of the OSG features, probably not before at least 2010 or 2011
(2 or 3
years delay).
snip
Why isn't it
I'll have to admit , I'm also in favor of moving forward , not backwards :).
Personally I'd like to see an OSG release , to demonstrate that FG IS
progressing , it seems
a lot of users are trying to use CVS aircraft with version 1.0 despite
warnings that they might not work :)
my 2 cents
cheers
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 6:21 PM, Csaba Halász [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Arnt Karlsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
..I use a 2 box approach; wget off the jpg-factory to another
box, then use an encoder to scale 'n encode your jpg pile into
a movie. I see no fps
James Turner wrote
On 3 Oct 2008, at 13:48, Matthew Tippett wrote:
Speaking of which, another call out for multithreading... The GPU
isn't the limiting factor in our tests, the CPU is. Even mid-low end
systems have 2-4 cores these days, and with the multi-display demo we
are
On vendredi 03 octobre 2008, Erik Hofman wrote:
Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/source/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/atmosphere
In directory baron.flightgear.org:/tmp/cvs-serv4564/models/atmosphere
Modified Files:
Tag: PRE_OSG_PLIB_20061029
FGMSIS.cpp FGMars.cpp
Log Message:
Sync. w.
Hi Frederic,
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Martin Spott a ??crit :
This reminds me of the tiling scheme as mentioned here - which
apparently has proven to be quite successful:
http://lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/tiling/2006-September/52.html
Don't miss the attachment at the bottom of
Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Martin Spott a ??crit :
http://lists.eogeo.org/pipermail/tiling/2006-September/52.html
Don't miss the attachment at the bottom of the page,
It appears that I implemented a mapping like this, without knowing the
existence of this document.
Did you know
20 matches
Mail list logo
