[Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Hi, last week, James dropped the idea of moving our website (partly) over to the wiki. So far I have discussed this with a couple of people, all of which have different opinions. Therefore, I would like to ask anyone that cares about our website to reply. I think we all agree that our current website cannot continue like it does right now. We've had multiple discussions in the past, even leading to some test website (like the ones by Pete), but none of them led to something. I have listed a couple of pro's and con's (IMO, and based on a small IRC duscission) below. This list is dynamic, as pro's can become con's and vice versa. + Easy to update: wiki articles can be edited by all people, in stead of just a single man (Curt :P). As we have seen in the past (and even till today), our website is often out of date. A good example of this is the CVS/Git page, which hasn't been updated since May (!), and still does not contain any useful info if I want to use Git. Of course we don't want some of our important pages (main page, download etc.) to be edited by just anyone with a wiki account. Luckily, we can add usergroups at the wiki and assign permissions to them. Thus, important pages can be locked (on the edit part) for the ordinary users. We've been doing this with all Newsletters, which can be edited only by wiki-admins after their publicication. We could create various groups, and people can be within multiple groups at once. + Easy to link to detailed documentation: rather than providing an external link, we can add internal links to each word (okay, that's a little too much). If a text mentions $FG_ROOT, we can make that word link to the wiki- article about it. This will decrease the amount of useless questions at the forum (which are replied by a link to the wiki), which is meant for special, personalised help and discussions. + Download page: since the wiki already contains quite some information per aircraft, it could be used to auto- generate a more detailed aircraft download page. Each aircraft on that page can link to the aircraft's private page (if existing) and thus provide manuals, status info etc. immediately to the user, even before downloading the aircraft. As we've had quite some complaints from people that are disappointed after dowloading. The wiki can provde various screenshots per aircraft (eg. interior, exterior), so users can see-what-they-get. + Publicity of the wiki: new FG users will be immediately aware of the existence of a wiki, and therefore be stimulated to start developing themselves. This will again decrease the useless questions at the forum. - Less attractive layout: currently the FlightGear wiki doesn't really look like a website. This could be solved though by creating/adding a different style/layout. - Less open system: for example, it will be harder to implement additional features (gallery's, search engines) etc. However, the alternative is a CMS system, which isn't much opener... - Not much examples: of a complete wiki website about projects like ours. This could be a pro as well, as it will allow us to be renewed and different. Jester (IIRC) mentioned that it is important to check whether pages are cached at the wiki, so they won't have to be pulled from the database each time. If so, we should enable cache. A possible other solution is to have a static frontpage, which could be nice in various ways, other than the cache... I look forward to receiving your ideas/opinions/questions! When the list grow, we might benefit from setting up a wiki article to collect ideas/opinions. Cheers, Gijs -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Gijs, This sounds like a worthwhile proposal. Why not set up the wiki page etc. so that we can compare and come up with an informed decision, rather than some pre-formed opinions. (4 FG Developers - 5 opinions. One will change their mind :-)) Vivian -Original Message- From: Gijs de Rooy [mailto:gijsr...@hotmail.com] Sent: 10 October 2010 11:07 To: FlightGear Development list Subject: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki Hi, last week, James dropped the idea of moving our http://www.flightgear.org/ website (partly) over to the wiki http://wiki.flightgear.org/ . So far I have discussed this with a couple of people, all of which have different opinions. Therefore, I would like to ask anyone that cares about our website to reply. I think we all agree that our current website cannot continue like it does right now. We've had multiple discussions in the past, even leading to some test website (like the ones by Pete), but none of them led to something. I have listed a couple of pro's and con's (IMO, and based on a small IRC duscission) below. This list is dynamic, as pro's can become con's and vice versa. + Easy to update: wiki articles can be edited by all people, in stead of just a single man (Curt :P). As we have seen in the past (and even till today), our website is often out of date. A good example of this is the CVS/Git http://flightgear.org/cvs.html page, which hasn't been updated since May (!), and still does not contain any useful info if I want to use Git. Of course we don't want some of our important pages (main page, download etc.) to be edited by just anyone with a wiki account. Luckily, we can add usergroups at the wiki and assign permissions to them. Thus, important pages can be locked (on the edit part) for the ordinary users. We've been doing this with all Newsletters, which can be edited only by wiki-admins after their publicication. We could create various groups, and people can be within multiple groups at once. + Easy to link to detailed documentation: rather than providing an external link, we can add internal links to each word (okay, that's a little too much). If a text mentions $FG_ROOT, we can make that word link to the wiki- http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/$FG_ROOT article about it. This will decrease the amount of useless questions at the forum (which are replied by a link to the wiki), which is meant for special, personalised help and discussions. + Download page: since the wiki already contains quite some information per aircraft, it could be used to auto- generate a more detailed aircraft download page. Each aircraft on that page can link to the aircraft's private page (if existing) and thus provide manuals, status info etc. immediately to the user, even before downloading the aircraft. As we've had quite some complaints from people that are disappointed after dowloading. The wiki can provde various screenshots per aircraft (eg. interior, exterior), so users can see-what-they-get. + Publicity of the wiki: new FG users will be immediately aware of the existence of a wiki, and therefore be stimulated to start developing themselves. This will again decrease the useless questions at the forum. - Less attractive layout: currently the FlightGear wiki doesn't really look like a website. This could be solved though by creating/adding a different style/layout. - Less open system: for example, it will be harder to implement additional features (gallery's, search engines) etc. However, the alternative is a CMS system, which isn't much opener... - Not much examples: of a complete wiki website about projects like ours. This could be a pro as well, as it will allow us to be renewed and different. Jester (IIRC) mentioned that it is important to check whether pages are cached at the wiki, so they won't have to be pulled from the database each time. If so, we should enable cache. A possible other solution is to have a static frontpage, which could be nice in various ways, other than the cache... I look forward to receiving your ideas/opinions/questions! When the list grow, we might benefit from setting up a wiki article to collect ideas/opinions. Cheers, Gijs -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Hi, I like this idea as well! A good and fantastic simulation project as FlightGear needs a better represantion on the web if we want to be as successfull as we are now. The only thing I fear is: that it will be another useless discussion, without any resultat CheersHeiko still in work: http://www.hoerbird.net/galerie.html But already done: http://www.hoerbird.net/reisen.html --- Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com schrieb am So, 10.10.2010: Von: Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com Betreff: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki An: FlightGear Development list flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Datum: Sonntag, 10. Oktober, 2010 12:06 Uhr Hi, last week, James dropped the idea of moving our website (partly) over to the wiki. So far I have discussed this with a couple of people, all of which have different opinions. Therefore, I would like to ask anyone that cares about our website to reply. I think we all agree that our current website cannot continue like it does right now. We've had multiple discussions in the past, even leading to some test website (like the ones by Pete), but none of them led to something. I have listed a couple of pro's and con's (IMO, and based on a small IRC duscission) below. This list is dynamic, as pro's can become con's and vice versa. + Easy to update: wiki articles can be edited by all people, in stead of just a single man (Curt :P). As we have seen in the past (and even till today), our website is often out of date. A good example of this is the CVS/Git page, which hasn't been updated since May (!), and still does not contain any useful info if I want to use Git. Of course we don't want some of our important pages (main page, download etc.) to be edited by just anyone with a wiki account. Luckily, we can add usergroups at the wiki and assign permissions to them. Thus, important pages can be locked (on the edit part) for the ordinary users. We've been doing this with all Newsletters, which can be edited only by wiki-admins after their publicication. We could create various groups, and people can be within multiple groups at once. + Easy to link to detailed documentation: rather than providing an external link, we can add internal links to each word (okay, that's a little too much). If a text mentions $FG_ROOT, we can make that word link to the wiki- article about it. This will decrease the amount of useless questions at the forum (which are replied by a link to the wiki), which is meant for special, personalised help and discussions. + Download page: since the wiki already contains quite some information per aircraft, it could be used to auto- generate a more detailed aircraft download page. Each aircraft on that page can link to the aircraft's private page (if existing) and thus provide manuals, status info etc. immediately to the user, even before downloading the aircraft. As we've had quite some complaints from people that are disappointed after dowloading. The wiki can provde various screenshots per aircraft (eg. interior, exterior), so users can see-what-they-get. + Publicity of the wiki: new FG users will be immediately aware of the existence of a wiki, and therefore be stimulated to start developing themselves. This will again decrease the useless questions at the forum. - Less attractive layout: currently the FlightGear wiki doesn't really look like a website. This could be solved though by creating/adding a different style/layout. - Less open system: for example, it will be harder to implement additional features (gallery's, search engines) etc. However, the alternative is a CMS system, which isn't much opener... - Not much examples: of a complete wiki website about projects like ours. This could be a pro as well, as it will allow us to be renewed and different. Jester (IIRC) mentioned that it is important to check whether pages are cached at the wiki, so they won't have to be pulled from the database each time. If so, we should enable cache. A possible other solution is to have a static frontpage, which could be nice in various ways, other than the cache... I look forward to receiving your ideas/opinions/questions! When the list grow, we might benefit from setting up a wiki article to collect ideas/opinions. Cheers, Gijs -Integrierter Anhang folgt- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb -Integrierter Anhang folgt- ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Gijs de Rooy wrote: - Less open system: for example, it will be harder to implement additional features (gallery's, search engines) etc. However, the alternative is a CMS system, which isn't much opener... I'm uncertain about how to read this final conclusion. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Hey! Torsten wrote: From time to time, I notices some abuse by inserted spam into our wiki pages. Great care must be taken, our home page is locked for the everybody group. Of course. Additionally I will look for some more anti-spam measures that we could install at the wiki. The layout/design is editable and with some knowledge, the skin may be replaced (you did this before, did you?) There are quite some skins available on the web (also GNU GPL ones), that we can choose from. Just like I did with the forum, it is possible to addapt an pre-existing skin slightly (or less slightly) and add our own logo/images to the header for example. Then, of course it is also important that the content looks nice. The main page as it is know exists of some very simple (colored) tables. We could easily replace the tablecolors with some rounder bars for example. That will be similar to the difference between the English and Dutch Wikipedia. Heiko wrote: The only thing I fear is: that it will be another useless discussion, without any resultat If we don't start the discussion we won't have any result at all. And given the fact that we were able to go through quite some updates the past year(s) (move to Gitorious, moving wiki and forum over to a new server, slightly updated forum layout and a different structure), I am hopefull. :) Scott wrote: I'd like to throw in WordPress as perhaps a better website content system than Wiki. It is good to look at alternatives. However, I don't really see the advantage of WordPress over the wiki. In the end, only a couple of pages will be static. Most of the content at our current website is documentation(-related) anyway... I might be wrong, so I'm open to other's opinions ;) Martin wrote: Gijs wrote: - Less open system: for example, it will be harder to implement additional features (gallery's, search engines) etc. However, the alternative is a CMS system, which isn't much opener... I'm uncertain about how to read this final conclusion. I agree that I didn't explain it very well. What I meant is that with an ordinary HTML website, you have quick, full control over everything. Adding certain things is usually just a matter of uploading some files and adding some code. With CMS/Wiki, this involves installing addons. There are no addons for everything; and additionally certain thing can easily interfer with eachother. Therefore, it might be hard to add those features easily... Question is: are there really (that many) features that we cannot install easily on a wiki/CMS? I have requested the wiki admin to install a couple of addons. When that's done, I will set some example pages up, so we can see how it looks and feels. Thanks for sharing all of your thoughts so far! Cheers, Gijs -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
Hi Gijs, Gijs de Rooy wrote: Question is: are there really (that many) features that we cannot install easily on a wiki/CMS? The most prominent item that comes into my mind is what is probably well-decribed as dynamic content (choose a better term, if you like). Being the technical maintainer of another Wiki instance, the item which I'd consider to be most-needed is the ability just to drop some P* script programming language code into the page and let this program code render whatever fits my needs. Just as one among other obvious examples: Most of us certainly know, that editing tables in *Wiki is a major PITA (TM). I'd like to drop some P* code into the page which is capable of operating on top of a database handle and does the formatting of the DB query result (obviously accompagnied by some caching mechanism). Or, as a FG-related example, think of the aircraft download page: Wouldn't it be nice just to let some programming code hook onto whichever repository you like and have the download page generated on the fly (caching applies here as well). In general, with a 'sophisticated' website I'd like to have the ability to drop some scripting code into whichever place on a website I like to do whatever I like. According to my knowledge this is not going to work with *Wiki. I _guess_ it's possible with systems of the Drupal-league, certainly with Django and comparable (or bigger) systems. The latter ones, on the other hand, require more programming to get even the core setup running ;-) Nevertheless I agree with the forementioned opinion that the biggest obstacle on the way to a better (TM) website might not be a technical one. Best regards, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear website on wiki
On Sun, 10 Oct 2010, Torsten Dreyer wrote: From time to time, I notices some abuse by inserted spam into our wiki pages. Great care must be taken, our home page is locked for the everybody group. If you're using the Wikimedia engine, you can install a plug-in that will require accounts to be validated before posting access can be granted. Part of the sign-up process requires the user enter a biographical description that can require a specific number of words before they can submit the request. This would go a long way towards discouraging spammers and would give the admin something to help decide whether or not to enable the account. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 14:10:58 -0400, Gary wrote in message aanlktikrukm+kk2runqqklqcwymy1vjpuvi79n715...@mail.gmail.com: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Arnt Karlsen a...@c2i.net wrote: On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 00:16:40 -0400, Gary wrote in message aanlktikcpogneb+aonmfgddctnkftfsyqv6evl+9g...@mail.gmail.com: Can anyone help with a 3D cloud issue? The clouds now display as identical flat gray panels instead of their usual realistic appearance. This has persisted for (guessing) 6-8 weeks now. Here are a couple screen shots to illustrate the problem- http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1671/3dclouds1.jpg http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8100/3dclouds2.jpg FlightGear and SimgGear are Gitorious 'next' branch, fgdata is Gitorious 'master'. ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ CPU, 2G memory. Video card is ATI Radeon 9700 Pro AGP. OS is Slackware64 Linux, kernel 2.6.35.5, X.org open source video driver (not the ATI proprietary one) using KMS. ..which one, ati, radeon or radeonhd??? With a 9700 Pro, you should be using ati or radeon. (If you are, try radeonhd to see how that works, it _should_ fail.) ..ati is a wrapper for radeon, mach64 and r128, X should pick the right one for your card, but sometimes the automagic fails. Hmm. It loads both ati and radeon modules, then the log output is tagged RADEON(0). So it must be using the radeon driver. They don't exactly make it easy to tell :-) It's not radeonhd, my card is pre-HD. ..you posted picture links, how about your log links? Good point. X server log: http://www.mediafire.com/?21cfo1sb4v6h694 ..I find a line '(**) RADEON(0): Option AccelDFS 1', which I suspect may correspond to an option line in your /etc/X11/xorg.conf (Option AccelDFS 1), try comment it out and see what happens. ..http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon says Option AccelDFS should be # 1/0 On for PCIE, off for AGP, http://www.x.org/wiki/radeon suggests there are changes in e.g. DFS that now stall things that used to work. ..http://www.free3d.org/ for X tweak benchmarks. ;o) ..your X log is taken after a FG run? Anything in dmesg output? FlightGear console output: http://www.mediafire.com/?w49t2gc4iihu6gg -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Build failed in Hudson: FlightGear-next-mac #230
See http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/FlightGear-next-mac/230/ -- Started by user geneb Building remotely on MacPro Checkout:FlightGear-next-mac / http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/FlightGear-next-mac/ws/ - hudson.remoting.chan...@b46c4c:MacPro Using strategy: Default Last Built Revision: Revision b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2 (origin/next) Checkout:FlightGear-next-mac / http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/FlightGear-next-mac/ws/ - hudson.remoting.localchan...@2d2acaf5 GitAPI created Fetching changes from the remote Git repository Fetching upstream changes from http://git.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear.git [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git fetch -t http://git.gitorious.org/fg/flightgear.git +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git ls-tree HEAD [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git tag -l next [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git rev-parse origin/next Commencing build of Revision b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2 (origin/next) GitAPI created Checking out Revision b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2 (origin/next) [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git checkout -f b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2 [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git tag -a -f -m Hudson Build #230 hudson-FlightGear-next-mac-230 Recording changes in branch origin/next [FlightGear-next-mac] $ git whatchanged --no-abbrev -M --pretty=raw b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2..b9f2f432b3c6894b4bc39d9a6176443f1ee6f1a2 ERROR: Failed to copy artifacts from Simgear-next-mac with filter: dist/** hudson.util.IOException2: hudson.util.IOException2: Failed to extract /var/lib/hudson/jobs/Simgear-next-mac/builds/2010-10-07_11-14-20/archive/dist/** at hudson.FilePath.copyRecursiveTo(FilePath.java:1474) at hudson.FilePath.copyRecursiveTo(FilePath.java:1399) at hudson.plugins.copyartifact.CopyArtifact.perform(CopyArtifact.java:170) at hudson.tasks.BuildStepMonitor$1.perform(BuildStepMonitor.java:19) at hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractRunner.perform(AbstractBuild.java:601) at hudson.model.Build$RunnerImpl.build(Build.java:174) at hudson.model.Build$RunnerImpl.doRun(Build.java:138) at hudson.model.AbstractBuild$AbstractRunner.run(AbstractBuild.java:416) at hudson.model.Run.run(Run.java:1280) at hudson.model.FreeStyleBuild.run(FreeStyleBuild.java:46) at hudson.model.ResourceController.execute(ResourceController.java:88) at hudson.model.Executor.run(Executor.java:137) Caused by: java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException: hudson.util.IOException2: Failed to extract /var/lib/hudson/jobs/Simgear-next-mac/builds/2010-10-07_11-14-20/archive/dist/** at hudson.remoting.Channel$2.adapt(Channel.java:663) at hudson.remoting.Channel$2.adapt(Channel.java:658) at hudson.remoting.FutureAdapter.get(FutureAdapter.java:55) at hudson.FilePath.copyRecursiveTo(FilePath.java:1472) ... 11 more Caused by: hudson.util.IOException2: Failed to extract /var/lib/hudson/jobs/Simgear-next-mac/builds/2010-10-07_11-14-20/archive/dist/** at hudson.FilePath.readFromTar(FilePath.java:1577) at hudson.FilePath.access$100(FilePath.java:159) at hudson.FilePath$32.invoke(FilePath.java:1463) at hudson.FilePath$32.invoke(FilePath.java:1460) at hudson.FilePath$FileCallableWrapper.call(FilePath.java:1899) at hudson.remoting.UserRequest.perform(UserRequest.java:114) at hudson.remoting.UserRequest.perform(UserRequest.java:48) at hudson.remoting.Request$2.run(Request.java:270) at java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:441) at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask$Sync.innerRun(FutureTask.java:303) at java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:138) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.runTask(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:886) at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:908) at hudson.remoting.Engine$1$1.run(Engine.java:58) at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:637) Caused by: java.util.zip.ZipException: incomplete dynamic bit lengths tree at java.util.zip.InflaterInputStream.read(InflaterInputStream.java:147) at java.util.zip.GZIPInputStream.read(GZIPInputStream.java:92) at org.apache.tools.tar.TarBuffer.readBlock(TarBuffer.java:257) at org.apache.tools.tar.TarBuffer.readRecord(TarBuffer.java:223) at hudson.org.apache.tools.tar.TarInputStream.read(TarInputStream.java:345) at java.io.FilterInputStream.read(FilterInputStream.java:90) at org.apache.commons.io.IOUtils.copyLarge(IOUtils.java:1025) at org.apache.commons.io.IOUtils.copy(IOUtils.java:999) at hudson.util.IOUtils.copy(IOUtils.java:33) at hudson.FilePath.readFromTar(FilePath.java:1565) ... 14 more
[Flightgear-devel] [patch] Improved Nasal access to airport information
Hi All, I've been working on a small patch to change the existing global Nasal function airportinfo() to return more than one result. With this patch, and optional argument allows the caller to specify the number of nearest airports to return. E.g. airportinfo(10), returns the nearest 10 airports, and airportinfo(55.5, -3, 10) returns the 10 nearest airports to lat 55.5M, lon 3W. This changes the return values of this function from a hash containing a single airport to a vector of hashes, so requires a very straightforward update to all Nasal calls to airportinfo(). Previously one would call var airport = airportinfo(); After this patch, this must be changed to var airport = airportinfo()[0]; I'm happy to make this change to the dozen or so instances in fgdata (I have commit permissions to fgdata but not the flightgear source), assuming people approve of the change. I'm away on business this week, so it would probably best wait until next weekend unless someone is particularly keen to patch fgdata as well. My original motivation for this change is to create a Nasal-driven dialog displaying the local airport frequencies, something previously provided by ATCDCL, and which hasn't yet been replaced. Unfortunately I only noticed that frequency information isn't distributing through the FGAirport object after writing the patch below! The patch is available from http://www.nanjika.co.uk/flightgear/airport.patch Comments etc. very welcome as always. -Stuart -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [patch] Improved Nasal access to airport information
Am 10.10.10 18:06, schrieb Stuart Buchanan: Hi All, I've been working on a small patch to change the existing global Nasal function airportinfo() to return more than one result. With this patch, and optional argument allows the caller to specify the number of nearest airports to return. E.g. airportinfo(10), returns the nearest 10 airports, and airportinfo(55.5, -3, 10) returns the 10 nearest airports to lat 55.5M, lon 3W. This changes the return values of this function from a hash containing a single airport to a vector of hashes, so requires a very straightforward update to all Nasal calls to airportinfo(). Previously one would call var airport = airportinfo(); After this patch, this must be changed to var airport = airportinfo()[0]; I'm happy to make this change to the dozen or so instances in fgdata (I have commit permissions to fgdata but not the flightgear source), assuming people approve of the change. I'm away on business this week, so it would probably best wait until next weekend unless someone is particularly keen to patch fgdata as well. My original motivation for this change is to create a Nasal-driven dialog displaying the local airport frequencies, something previously provided by ATCDCL, and which hasn't yet been replaced. Unfortunately I only noticed that frequency information isn't distributing through the FGAirport object after writing the patch below! The patch is available from http://www.nanjika.co.uk/flightgear/airport.patch Comments etc. very welcome as always. Sounds like a good idea. I am working on an extended METAR system allowing to fetch METAR data for an arbitrary number of stations. This will allow lateral (not only timed) interpolation of weather. Looks like these two systems might be a perfect fit. Torsten -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FG hangs on startup when nearby airport
Torsten Dreyer wrote: Here is the relevant code: from src/FDM/fdm_shell.cxx Indeed, commenting the if (globals-get_scenery[...] clause makes FlightGear skip the infinite loop. Thanks a lot for getting me started into investigations. For the purpose of Scenery development - and probably other, even more obscure tasks - having an option to pre-set the old behaviour via some command line flag would be much appreciated. Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Automatic runway selection broken by weather interpolation
Hi Guys, I think I've found a bug in the new weather environment code. I started up at Austin Bergstrom International (KAUS), a fairly large Texas airport with runways 17L/R, 35L/R. The METAR had wind of 9 knots at 190 degrees. I would expect FG to start on runway 17. Instead it starts on 35L. Looking at the Global Weather dialog immediately after startup shows the wind passing through 260 degrees as it veers around to 190. I suspect that when the runways selection code is run, the wind is still at 0 heading, causing runway 35L to be chosen. Given this and the previously reported problem with pressure settings (which still changes too slowly IMO - the pressure is often still changing after I've set the altimeter) I think we need to be explicitly setting the environment on initialization, rather than relying on the interpolation XML to interpolate to the current METAR or config. -Stuart -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Arnt Karlsen a...@c2i.net wrote: On Sat, 9 Oct 2010 14:10:58 -0400, Gary wrote in message aanlktikrukm+kk2runqqklqcwymy1vjpuvi79n715...@mail.gmail.com: On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 12:38 PM, Arnt Karlsen a...@c2i.net wrote: On Fri, 8 Oct 2010 00:16:40 -0400, Gary wrote in message aanlktikcpogneb+aonmfgddctnkftfsyqv6evl+9g...@mail.gmail.com: Can anyone help with a 3D cloud issue? The clouds now display as identical flat gray panels instead of their usual realistic appearance. This has persisted for (guessing) 6-8 weeks now. Here are a couple screen shots to illustrate the problem- http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1671/3dclouds1.jpg http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/8100/3dclouds2.jpg FlightGear and SimgGear are Gitorious 'next' branch, fgdata is Gitorious 'master'. ASUS A8V Deluxe motherboard, AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ CPU, 2G memory. Video card is ATI Radeon 9700 Pro AGP. OS is Slackware64 Linux, kernel 2.6.35.5, X.org open source video driver (not the ATI proprietary one) using KMS. ..which one, ati, radeon or radeonhd??? With a 9700 Pro, you should be using ati or radeon. (If you are, try radeonhd to see how that works, it _should_ fail.) ..ati is a wrapper for radeon, mach64 and r128, X should pick the right one for your card, but sometimes the automagic fails. Hmm. It loads both ati and radeon modules, then the log output is tagged RADEON(0). So it must be using the radeon driver. They don't exactly make it easy to tell :-) It's not radeonhd, my card is pre-HD. ..you posted picture links, how about your log links? Good point. X server log: http://www.mediafire.com/?21cfo1sb4v6h694 ..I find a line '(**) RADEON(0): Option AccelDFS 1', which I suspect may correspond to an option line in your /etc/X11/xorg.conf (Option AccelDFS 1), try comment it out and see what happens. Correct. I set it to 0, didn't seem to change anything. Xorg.0.log echoed the config line but there was no other diff from the previous log. ..http://dri.freedesktop.org/wiki/ATIRadeon says Option AccelDFS should be # 1/0 On for PCIE, off for AGP, http://www.x.org/wiki/radeon suggests there are changes in e.g. DFS that now stall things that used to work. ..http://www.free3d.org/ for X tweak benchmarks. ;o) ..your X log is taken after a FG run? No, but I checked it again just now after running FG and nothing had been added. Anything in dmesg output? No, nothing there either. Again, I appreciate you taking a look. You've given me good some ideas for further research, namely, looking at the KMS radeon driver sources for authoritative info on the different driver options. My config file hadn't been updated for a while and some of the options weren't even recognized any more. My other idea is to grovel through the FG code that loads/executes shaders, and look for something that indicates whether they worked or not - just plug in some calls to printf(), and try to see what's happening in there. FlightGear console output: http://www.mediafire.com/?w49t2gc4iihu6gg -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o) ...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. -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Beautiful is writing same markup. Internet Explorer 9 supports standards for HTML5, CSS3, SVG 1.1, ECMAScript5, and DOM L2 L3. Spend less time writing and rewriting code and more time creating great experiences on the web. Be a part of the beta today. http://p.sf.net/sfu/beautyoftheweb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel