think it
will be too useful to submit a 2.5 year old diff.
Here's a version that applies to current CVS and compiles with a
tolerable amount of warnings:
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Plib_ssgDList2-20050105.diff
Unfortunately I don't have a clear idea on where to look
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..what am I doing wrong here? patch -p1 never failed me even
when the kernel said use patch -p0 .
The '-psomething'-switch is not for arbitrary parameters, it has some
real sense :-) Please have a look at the manpage, it doesn't make
sense for
Jim Wilson wrote:
gzip extracts pkzip files.
Maybe the Linux version, nut the one shipped with IRIX.
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Jim Wilson wrote:
Unzip is an archiver and runs on just about anything. Comes with several
linux distributions as well.
Yes, but not all. That's the point. Should we honor Windows users where
there are some version of windows that ship with an ZIP extractor or
honor the UNIX world that comes
Erik Hofman wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:flightgear-devel-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Sent: 05 January 2005 09:00
To: FlightGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Individual aircraft downloads
Jim Wilson wrote:
Unzip is
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 09:22, Vivian Meazza wrote:
We should do both - that seems to be the solution adopted by most web sites
which offer downloads. Why should we be different? We should not expect
windows or UNIX users to download and install some additional software.
I could make a
Anyone interested? :o)
Yes. Is there a protocol spec available?
Cheers
-Gerhard
--
Gerhard Wesp o o Tel.: +41 (0) 43 5347636
Bachtobelstrasse 56 | http://www.cosy.sbg.ac.at/~gwesp/
CH-8045 Zuerich \_/ See homepage for email address!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dave Martin schrieb:
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 09:22, Vivian Meazza wrote:
We should do both - that seems to be the solution adopted by most web sites
which offer downloads. Why should we be different? We should not expect
windows or UNIX users
James Turner wrote:
For some reason, I have never seen code to do this with the .tar.gz
format, thought in principle it should work; the issue is that ZIPs
have a table of contents that can be read without extracting all the
files, whereas for a .tar.gz I think you'd have to uncompresss
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 10:44, Christian Mayer wrote:
Dave Martin schrieb:
I could make a really scathing comment about that using words like plib,
OpenAL and SimGear...
But those are for *developers* and not *users*.
I was more making the point that unless a Linux *user* uses one of
Erik Hofman said:
Jim Wilson wrote:
Unzip is an archiver and runs on just about anything. Comes with several
linux distributions as well.
Yes, but not all. That's the point. Should we honor Windows users where
there are some version of windows that ship with an ZIP extractor or
David Megginson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2005 23:39:49 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
They also have a version with two Lycoming IO-360 for the North
American market,
Is that out yet?
I don't know if it already made its maiden flight, but the engines are
already mounted
Martin Spott wrote:
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Plib_ssgDList2-20050105.diff
Unfortunately I don't have a clear idea on where to look at in order to
find out if it works correctly
Well, I'll rebuild SimGear and FlightGear and I'll see later,
It works for me (on IRIX
Martin Spott wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Plib_ssgDList2-20050105.diff
Unfortunately I don't have a clear idea on where to look at in order to
find out if it works correctly
Well, I'll rebuild SimGear and FlightGear and I'll see later,
It works
Erik Hofman wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
Martin Spott wrote:
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Plib_ssgDList2-20050105.diff
Unfortunately I don't have a clear idea on where to look at in order to
find out if it works correctly
Well, I'll rebuild SimGear and FlightGear and I'll see
Jon Stockill wrote:
Is there a fix yet for see runway through instruments which happens on
the B1900D and dhc2F?
I don't think there are any instruments in those aircraft (just a hole
in the panel)?
Erik
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Hi All
Has anyone else noticed that the airspeed display and
the altitude display go to all zero's when the aircraft nose
goes below the horizon in FG 9.6.Also on T/O roll on 28R at KSFO they
go to zero when the A/C gets to about 100 kts.I guess something
is broke because the problem dose not
Jon Stockill wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote:
It should fix the see panel through fuselage problem. At best it
doesn't affect frame rate, normally I would expect it to decrease slightly.
Is there a fix yet for see runway through instruments which happens on
the B1900D and dhc2F?
Yep, this is
I happened across this while looking for blender inspiration:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=189884
Although the quality will not be seen in FGFS for a very long time, I
think you'll agree that this guy is very talented indeed!
All the best,
Matthew.
Curt,
See this discussion between David M. and me about setting property values in
source code vs. setting them in config files.
http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-devel/2004-November/031882.html
After this I removed all set serviceable property to true from
instrumentation and
That's encouraging. And thanks for the steer to GMax.
R
- Original Message -
From: Ampere K. Hardraade [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: FlightGear developers discussions flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
Sent: Wednesday, January 05, 2005 3:09 AM
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] 3d panels - newbie
On
Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
Curt,
See this discussion between David M. and me about setting property values in
source code vs. setting them in config files.
http://baron.flightgear.org/pipermail/flightgear-devel/2004-November/031882.html
After this I removed all set serviceable property to true
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 13:44, Matthew Law wrote:
I happened across this while looking for blender inspiration:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=189884
Although the quality will not be seen in FGFS for a very long time, I
think you'll agree that this guy is very talented indeed!
Matthew Law said:
I happened across this while looking for blender inspiration:
http://www.cgtalk.com/showthread.php?t=189884
Although the quality will not be seen in FGFS for a very long time, I
think you'll agree that this guy is very talented indeed!
I'd just like to spend a few
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:57:54 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People doing business in North America usually share the impression
that people 'over there' are commonly a lot more conservative when it
comes to aircraft engines. And they have a strong lobby: One of the
major
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:01:49 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the solution? We can't initialize any number of arbitrary
serviceable properties in the preferences.xml and I've always been
nervous about doing htat anyway. If we also can't do it in code, then
were are
Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
Is there a fix yet for see runway through instruments which happens
on the B1900D and dhc2F?
I don't think there are any instruments in those aircraft (just a hole
in the panel)?
Hmmm, I thought there were instruments fitted - if not, then just ignore
me
Jon Stockill wrote:
Erik Hofman wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
Is there a fix yet for see runway through instruments which
happens on the B1900D and dhc2F?
I don't think there are any instruments in those aircraft (just a
hole in the panel)?
Hmmm, I thought there were instruments fitted - if not,
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of either of
these. How about the Citation-II that looks good here too, but is by
the same author ... (?)
I'll try it when I get home, and grab some screenshots.
--
Jon Stockill
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
David Megginson wrote:
Eventually, we'll have some new piston engines that work well and put
Lycoming and Continental to shame. The problem so far, I think, is
just that North Americans fly differently. From what I understand,
most European private pilots with piston aircraft fly short
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:02:22 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately the conversion produces horrible costs this might
lower in the future because the way the engine is being assembled is
going to be changed,
Lowering the conversion costs will help. Another
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 15:12, David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 15:02:22 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately the conversion produces horrible costs this might
lower in the future because the way the engine is being assembled is
going to be
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of either of
these. How about the Citation-II that looks good here too, but is by
the same author ... (?)
I'll try it when I get home, and grab some screenshots.
The DHC2 looks good now:
It's the start of a new year, so I thought it might be fun to look back
on 2004 and recall some interesting FlightGear facts and events, and
then look forward a bit to the upcoming year.
1. From June 1 through the end of the year, 103,201 copies of the
windows version of FG were downloaded
David Megginson wrote:
Lowering the conversion costs will help. Another point might be
marketing position: right now, I can install a 135 hp Thielert in my
Warrior that will give me more-or-less the same performance as the 160
hp Lycoming currently in it, only burning about 35% less fuel.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:24:20 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Warrior will never have a load like the 'bigger' ones because it
lacks the reinfoced airframe, not matter which engine you mount,
Is the Warrior's airframe weaker than the Archer's or Arrow's?
All the best,
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 10:17:53 -0600
Curtis L. Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's the start of a new year, so I thought it might be fun to look
back on 2004 and recall some interesting FlightGear facts and events,
and then look forward a bit to the upcoming year.
Heh. I have been meaning to post
David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 16:24:20 + (UTC), Martin Spott
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The Warrior will never have a load like the 'bigger' ones because it
lacks the reinfoced airframe, not matter which engine you mount,
Is the Warrior's airframe weaker than the Archer's or
On 1/5/05 at 4:17 PM Martin Spott wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of either of
these. How about the Citation-II that looks good here too, but is by
the same author ... (?)
I'll try it when I get home, and grab
David Luff wrote:
On 1/5/05 at 4:17 PM Martin Spott wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of either of
these. How about the Citation-II that looks good here too, but is by
the same author ... (?)
I'll try
Dave Martin wrote:
Christian Mayer wrote:
Dave Martin schrieb:
I could make a really scathing comment about that using words like
plib,
OpenAL and SimGear...
But those are for *developers* and not *users*.
I was more making the point that unless a Linux *user* uses one of the
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
What version of plib are you running? I'm running 1.8.3 (latest
release) here and have never noticed any problems with any of the
versions of these aircraft. (They are really well done by the way.)
The patch which caused the large increase in framerate appears to have
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
What version of plib are you running? I'm running 1.8.3 (latest
release) here and have never noticed any problems with any of the
versions of these aircraft. (They are really well done by the way.)
The patch which caused the large increase in
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
What version of plib are you running? I'm running 1.8.3 (latest
release) here and have never noticed any problems with any of the
versions of these aircraft. (They are really well done by the way.)
The patch which caused the large increase in
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of either of
these. How about the Citation-II that looks good here too, but is by
the same author ... (?)
I'll try it when I get home, and grab some screenshots.
A quick look in AC3D
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 18:42, Vivian Meazza wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
I've never noticed any holes in the instrument panels of
either of these. How about the Citation-II that looks
good here too, but is by the same author ... (?)
I'll try it when I
I'm not a pilot so could someone more informed than myself please tell me
which is the best type of manual to get if one wants to model an aircraft
including the avionics?
Does a POH/PIM contain the most useful info?
More importantly does it describe aircraft systems as well as procedures?
For GA aircraft (light aircraft) the POH is pretty much all there is, other
than maintenance manuals. The POH does not contain complete system
information. It contains enough for a pilot to understand the OPERATION of
the systems, so there are often some simplifications and approximations. So
Greetings,
I am a graduate student in Virginia working with FlightGear towards a MS
inaerospace engineeringandhuman factors. I am trying to
alter the existing HUDwithin FG to reflect a newly developedenergy
management algorithm.Ultimately, the pilot could matchicons
for bank, pitch, and
On Wednesday 05 Jan 2005 19:23, Paul Surgeon wrote:
I'm not a pilot so could someone more informed than myself please tell me
which is the best type of manual to get if one wants to model an aircraft
including the avionics?
Does a POH/PIM contain the most useful info?
More importantly does
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Adam Dershowitz schrieb:
For GA aircraft (light aircraft) the POH is pretty much all there is, other
than maintenance manuals. The POH does not contain complete system
information. It contains enough for a pilot to understand the OPERATION of
On Wednesday, 5 January 2005 22:54, Christian Mayer wrote:
Well, I've seen the manuals that come with an A310 - box of roughly
1m * 0.5m * folder-height (probably larger) full with overfilled folders.
No wonder they pay Airbus drivers such great salaries.
Were those just pilot manuals or did
David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:58:57 -0800, Alex Romosan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see the same thing (instruments are holes in the panel on the dhc2)
on linux/nvidia with the latest plib from cvs.
Are you running at 16 bpp or 24 bpp?
Here it's linux/nvidia at 24bpp using the
Jon Stockill wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:58:57 -0800, Alex Romosan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see the same thing (instruments are holes in the panel on the dhc2)
on linux/nvidia with the latest plib from cvs.
Are you running at 16 bpp or 24 bpp?
Here
David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:58:57 -0800, Alex Romosan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see the same thing (instruments are holes in the panel on the dhc2)
on linux/nvidia with the latest plib from cvs.
Are you running at 16 bpp or 24 bpp?
If it appears to be useful we could
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:58:57 -0800, Alex Romosan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see the same thing (instruments are holes in the panel on the dhc2)
on linux/nvidia with the latest plib from cvs.
Are you running at 16 bpp or 24 bpp?
24 bpp.
--alex--
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 18:03:38 -, Vivian wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Our Windows users (and they are probably the majority) for the most
part expect everything to be done for them, and for it all to work
right out of the box. Otherwise, they will give up at the first
hurdle, and,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Paul Surgeon schrieb:
On Wednesday, 5 January 2005 22:54, Christian Mayer wrote:
Well, I've seen the manuals that come with an A310 - box of roughly
1m * 0.5m * folder-height (probably larger) full with overfilled folders.
No wonder they pay
Martin Spott wrote:
David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 12:58:57 -0800, Alex Romosan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i see the same thing (instruments are holes in the panel on the dhc2)
on linux/nvidia with the latest plib from cvs.
Are you running at 16 bpp or 24 bpp?
If it
Curtis L. Olson writes:
David Luff wrote:
Wow, is that what it's meant to look like? Most of the instruments are
holes through to the runway on the dhc2, the b1900d and the Citation for me
on both Cygwin/ATI and Linux/NVidia OS/hardware combinations. I'd always
assumed they were
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:30:04 -, Jim wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Erik Hofman said:
Jim Wilson wrote:
Unzip is an archiver and runs on just about anything. Comes with
several linux distributions as well.
Yes, but not all. That's the point. Should we honor Windows
Hello,
I've been neglecting the Solaris platform for a while (mostly in favour
of FreeBSD). Now I'm back trying to build for the Sun:
make[5]: Entering directory `/usr/local/src/SimGear/simgear/scene/sky/clouds3d'
gcc -mcpu=hypersparc -mtune=hypersparc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I.
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 08:32:20 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
Arnt Karlsen wrote:
..what am I doing wrong here? patch -p1 never failed me even
when the kernel said use patch -p0 .
The '-psomething'-switch is not for arbitrary
On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 13:04:28 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Martin Spott wrote:
ftp://ftp.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Devel/Plib_ssgDList2-20050105.diff
Unfortunately I don't have a clear idea on where to look at in order
to find out if it works correctly
Thanks Christian and Chuck,
I think Linux would be the most direct but my comfort level
diminishesrapidly. I wouldappreciate an opportunity to review
the MSVC++ path if I can get together with Chuck.
Most of thisdevelopment willtake placein Suffolk,
andI'm devoting the entire semester to
Could it be possible that FlightGear is more popular than X-Plane on Mac OS X?
Take a look at the included screenshot. I recently added the port from
http://macflightgear.sourceforge.net to Apple Downloads and it seems
people like it for some reason.
While I prefer X-Plane myself I assume it's
On Thursday 06 Jan 2005 00:23, Arthur Wiebe wrote:
Could it be possible that FlightGear is more popular than X-Plane on Mac OS
X?
Take a look at the included screenshot. I recently added the port from
http://macflightgear.sourceforge.net to Apple Downloads and it seems
people like it for
While messing around with my scripts for inserting objects into the
scenery (it's now all database driven, with numerous datasets imported)
I decided I could do with a few landmarks. Here's a couple of views of
the first, also showing off the object positioning:
Innis Cunningham said:
Hi All
Has anyone else noticed that the airspeed display and
the altitude display go to all zero's when the aircraft nose
goes below the horizon in FG 9.6.Also on T/O roll on 28R at KSFO they
go to zero when the A/C gets to about 100 kts.I guess something
is broke
On Wednesday 05 January 2005 15:26, David Megginson wrote:
On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:01:49 -0600, Curtis L. Olson
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what's the solution? We can't initialize any number of arbitrary
serviceable properties in the preferences.xml and I've always been
nervous about
On January 5, 2005 02:23 pm, Paul Surgeon wrote:
I'm not a pilot so could someone more informed than myself please tell me
which is the best type of manual to get if one wants to model an aircraft
including the avionics?
If you are talking about 3D modelling, maintenance manuals and maintenance
On January 5, 2005 08:09 am, Erik Hofman wrote:
It works for me (on IRIX) and I don't see any artefacts so far, but I
don't see any framerate improvement neither. Should I - or which
improvement does the patch bring to FlightGear ?
It should fix the see panel through fuselage problem. At
Curtis L. Olson wrote:
1. From June 1 through the end of the year, 103,201 copies of the
windows version of FG were downloaded from the main FG ftp server. (The
logs only go back to June '04 ...) I'm sure some of those are repeat
customers or people that only tried running FG once or twice,
73 matches
Mail list logo
