Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 2:07 AM, Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: *Please* don't drop the z/Z key binding. This is one of the most useful and direct controls we have to affect the visual experience. (...) It's fecking difficult to operate a mouse/menu/slider while using a joystick unless you are ambidextrous (which I'm not) Can anyone please explain to me why one needs to change visibility manually during flight so often? [snip] I understand that visibility needs to be manually controllable for setting up specific training conditions. But this doesn't need to happen in-flight all the time and can be from the menu. I understand that visibility has a role for memory management, but that doesn't need to be done in-flight either, memory management can be done much more efficiently by setting a max. visibility value once and just store it. You can't micro-manage memory consumption by adjusting visibility all the time because a) you'd need to have an open system monitor to see memory occupancy and b) you'd need to know in advance how much memory the next tiles to be loaded will have. [snip] The question to me is not 'Do some people use it?' The question we should answer is 'Given the alternative between a key binding to change visibility and assigning a new key-binding to a function you can actually perform in a cockpit, isn't the second option better'? For instance assume we would assign z/Z to changing the NAV1 frequency or the heading of the AP - these are functions which I perform basically all the time when I don't do pure VFR and it's rather awkward to open the menu or hit a tiny clickspot. Personally, I think reserving key binding for things which you can really do in a real cockpit is not a bad concept. And I would really like to understand why some people think it's necessary to change the visibility so often that a menu option doesn't work for them whereas I need to change my NAV frequencies in the menu (while flying the plane with the mouse... I can do this with just one control device) As a Linux desktop user, in recent times I've come to expect this kind of discussion to be followed by permanent deletion of the entire feature in question, especially when it's related to user configuration and controllability. So I'll certainly cop to over-reacting on that basis - it was starting to sound like visibility would no longer be user-controllable at all. I have no issue with setting it by a slider or whatever, only with the idea of deleting it altogether, and it sounds like that wasn't being discussed after all. Given that, your detailed rationale for selecting key bindings makes a lot of sense. Gary -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues
On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Stuart Buchanan stuar...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2013 at 12:59 PM, James Turner wrote: Suggestion - if z/Z are pressed with advanced weather enabled, make the popup-message say 'disabled since visibility is being controlled by advanced weather'. Another option would be to move the visibility control to a dialog, with a slider / spin box, and explicitly disable it when advanced weather is selection. Then we could lose the keybinding completely, which is something I want to move towards for options that are infrequently used, but taking up 'keyboard space'. I agree that it shouldn't be a keyboard assignment, and we should remove it. On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Renk Thorsten thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: I don't think any of this is a real issue or under debate at the moment (?) - the whole discussion about z/Z is if the keybinding should be removed [...] *Please* don't drop the z/Z key binding. This is one of the most useful and direct controls we have to affect the visual experience. It allows the user to directly control the view out the window, trade off visuals for frame rate and smoothness on older hardware or complex scenery, and trade off realism of flight experience for the simple pleasure of looking out the window for those more into tourism. It can be useful for modifying a built-in weather scenario that's close but not exactly what is wanted. In short, it allows even the newest user to control their FlightGear visual experience according to their particular use case and need for realism. I have no problem at all with disabling the keys when (say) advanced weather is selected, but for several classes of users and types of use, it really is an important capability and is used often. Gary -- Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Shaders vs. frame rate;
Spoke too soon. The trees look great, but the frame rate hit makes it unusable (from 30-35 to 2-4) even with the other shaders disabled. On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 5:49 PM, Gary Carvell gary.carv...@gmail.com wrote: Thank you! I haven't had seen trees in FlightGear for ages (can't run with shaders). I didn't realize the trees were supported at all without shaders. Could that fix be applied automatically so the trees are visible whether shaders are on or off? Gary On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 5:52 AM, Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi all! Martin wrote: Does anyone know how to have the random trees without all this ? In Effects/trees.eff, comment out/remove line 23. !--property/sim/rendering/shader-effects/property-- If you would like to use the dialog to toggle the trees, you'll also need to edit gui/dialogs/rendering.xml and comment out line 200 to 202: !--enable property/sim/rendering/shader-effects/property /enable-- The Material Shaders options was meant (as far as I understand it) to disable all shader stuff with a single click. When the checkbox is checked, one an finetune what shaders need to be enabled, via the other checkboxes. The problem right now is that some of the shaders (eg. the reflection stuff and lightmap) only depend on that single Material Shaders property. It would be better if every single shader can be en/disabled via its own property/checkbox. But then we might end up with a pretty large rendering dialog... Cheers, Gijs -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Shaders vs. frame rate;
Thank you! I haven't had seen trees in FlightGear for ages (can't run with shaders). I didn't realize the trees were supported at all without shaders. Could that fix be applied automatically so the trees are visible whether shaders are on or off? Gary On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 5:52 AM, Gijs de Rooy gijsr...@hotmail.com wrote: Hi all! Martin wrote: Does anyone know how to have the random trees without all this ? In Effects/trees.eff, comment out/remove line 23. !--property/sim/rendering/shader-effects/property-- If you would like to use the dialog to toggle the trees, you'll also need to edit gui/dialogs/rendering.xml and comment out line 200 to 202: !--enable property/sim/rendering/shader-effects/property /enable-- The Material Shaders options was meant (as far as I understand it) to disable all shader stuff with a single click. When the checkbox is checked, one an finetune what shaders need to be enabled, via the other checkboxes. The problem right now is that some of the shaders (eg. the reflection stuff and lightmap) only depend on that single Material Shaders property. It would be better if every single shader can be en/disabled via its own property/checkbox. But then we might end up with a pretty large rendering dialog... Cheers, Gijs -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] Catalina abort on startup
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Arnt Karlsen a...@c2i.net wrote: ..we have more problems, I tested both the Catalina and the Catalina-plib, both segfaults on FG start-up: https://github.com/gasguru/flightgearthings/blob/master/catalinas -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...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. The segfault looks like the same problem, this commit should fix it. I believe those are the same property warnings I get. I should mention that the water loading operation didn't work smoothly - sometimes the counter would not increase, sometimes it would drop to zero while loading or after loading. That may have been operator error, it was late and I'm way out of practice. Gary -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] Catalina abort on startup
Hi all, I've noticed that the Catalina has been broken for some time. FlightGear aborts on startup with this message: Error loading aerodynamic function in aero/coefficient/CDhump: FGTable: row lookup is not monotonically increasing in row 2 of table in aero/coefficient/CDhump: 21252=42841 Aborting. Aircraft aerodynamics element has problems in file /opt/noarch/fg-root/Aircraft/PBY-Catalina/PBY-6.xml Unknown exception in the main loop. Aborting... segmentation violation Swapping the order of these two lines in PBY-6.xml appears to fix the problem: 775 42841.0.2800 776 21252.0.2100 Can anyone confirm this and commit the fix? Gary -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ 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
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Stuart Buchanan stuar...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 Oct 2010, at 05:16, Gary Carvell wrote: Can anyone help with a 3D cloud issue? The clouds now display as identical flat gray panels instead of their usual realistic appearance. Some quick questions. Are you getting this every time? Even with the Fair Weather scenario? Correct, every time. If the clouds appear, they are flat. Any errors on the console? Nothing obvious. Console output is here: http://www.mediafire.com/?w49t2gc4iihu6gg From the screenshot it looks like you've got some unrealistic textures rather than the cloud code being broken in itself. Do the cloud textures always turn to face the viewer, or can you see them side on? The textures should be ok. I'm using a clean copy of fgdata from Gitorious. The clouds always stay in one orientation - they don't move to face the viewer or aircraft. I can view them side on by looking around in Helicopter or Chase view, or from the cockpit by flying around. -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 -- 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 Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:33 AM, thorsten.i.r...@jyu.fi wrote: That seems like the shader not running - I can get this appearance of the clouds when I start Flightgear from a shell as a different user - then I don't get 3d acceleration from the graphics card (and lots of errors that shaders did not compile) and the clouds look exactly like that. They seem to fall back to some old default textures. Hmm. Is there any way to tell if the shaders are running? 3D acceleration works fine on my box with the open source X.org driver (which was not the case until fairly recently, it has matured a lot). I've never been that clear on how shaders work and my video card is an older one, maybe it lacks support for something? FWIW, I have Material Shaders enabled in the Rendering Options dialog - otherwise the 3D clouds disappear completely. So it seems like at least some shader functionality is working. But the individual shader options such as Crop Texture, Water Reflection, etc. don't seem to do anything. Toggling them doesn't affect the display in any obvious way. * Thorsten Can anyone help with a 3D cloud issue? The clouds now display as identical flat gray panels instead of their usual realistic appearance. Some quick questions. Are you getting this every time? Even with the Fair Weather scenario? Any errors on the console? From the screenshot it looks like you've got some unrealistic textures rather than the cloud code being broken in itself. Do the cloud textures always turn to face the viewer, or can you see them side on? -- 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
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
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 FlightGear console output: http://www.mediafire.com/?w49t2gc4iihu6gg Any help with this is much appreciated. Gary -- ..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
Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 4:57 PM, Stuart Buchanan stuar...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 7:02 PM, Gary Carvell wrote: FWIW, I have Material Shaders enabled in the Rendering Options dialog - otherwise the 3D clouds disappear completely. So it seems like at least some shader functionality is working. But the individual shader options such as Crop Texture, Water Reflection, etc. don't seem to do anything. Toggling them doesn't affect the display in any obvious way. What happens when you move the quality slider to the right? Does this have any effect on the crop shaders etc.? The quality slider didn't have any effect that I could see. Sounds like there is definitely something going on with the shaders. It very much sounds like your graphics card is no-longer performing any shader effects. Why that should be the case, I don't know. I poked around and found Typhoon Labs' Shader Designer app which runs on Linux. From trying some sample vertex / fragment shaders it looks like my system supports up to version 120 for both. The FG shader files are all tagged at #version 120 so that's good. I loaded several of FG's fragment and vertex shaders into Shader Designer. Some of them seemed to run, maybe - kind of hard to tell. The tree shaders produced some funky sparse black mesh patterns. Some small example shaders I got off the Net ran ok. So at least the card / open source driver look like they're *capable* of running shaders. Of course it's a long distance from that, to actually running real shaders in a real app. Reminds me of when I tried to learn OpenGL programming - it was such an achievement when my little program displayed anything at all besides a black rectangle. I don't see anything in the FlightGear log and I don't have enough experience parsing X server logs to diagnose the root cause. Sorry I can't be of more help. -Stuart No problem. I really appreciate you, Thorsten and Arnt taking a look. Will keep poking around on my end. -- 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
[Flightgear-devel] 3D clouds flat instead of fluffy
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. Any help with this is much appreciated. Gary -- 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
