This may be the first thing that everyone looked at, but are the brakes
set? (does it have brakes?)
g.
He Gene the problem has been solved by Jon
Yep. I spotted that about 3 messages after I posted my suggestion. I
guess that's what I get for not reading mail all weekend. :)
g.
--
Has anyone recently been able to build SimGear FlightGear using the
project files currently in CVS?
If so, what is your _exact_ directory structure? I fought with the build
process for over 2 hours last night before giving up in digust. :) The
path changes to the SimGear project file was
I'm not a windows user, but someone just reported success on the IRC
this morning. Apparently, the VC8 project still references FlightGear
\src\Instrumentation\annunciator.cxx and FlightGear\src\Instrumentation
\annunciator.hxx which no longer exist.
Ron, I haven't even gotten that far. :)
Still using VC7 but now that you are talking about Simgear ; I found
that the dir strcuture is not exactly what is it suposed to be (ie the
one the project use and the one we can see on the picture on someone's
page).
Doing a checkout added a 'source' level in my SG and FG dir struct so I
Hi Gene,
have a look at http://www.oflebbe.de/oflebbe/FlightGear/index.html
Maybe that helps.
That's what got me started down this little road. :)
g.
--
I'm not crazy, I'm plausibly off-nominal!
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
On Sat, 17 Mar 2007, Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
Harald, with SimGear I just added explicit paths. This is not working for
the FlightGear project.
For example, my tree goes:
FlightGear-FlightGear-source-??
-SimGear-source-simgear
When I explictly add
* Stuart Buchanan -- Friday 30 March 2007:
Functionally, it seems reasonable to force all IO access through a wrapper
.nas file in $FG_ROOT/Nasal that could attempt to restrict dangerous
activities.
But every Nasal code would have to have access to use those
wrapper/validator functions
Two patches today:
1) fix source property for mach display
2) added 6 structure contact points, no more falling through the
ground hopefully ;) (I just made up some spring coefficients)
Did someone already merge these patches ?
Martin.
Not yet.
I modified Csaba's
Gene Buckle wrote:
I modified Csaba's spring coefficients slightly (see attachement) so the
aircraft will rest on the ground without jumping around.
Ron, did you also happen to tweak it so that it wouldn't roll at idle
throttle without parking brakes?
What is the 'real' aircraft
On Mon, 2007-04-30 at 09:45 +, Martin Spott wrote:
Ron Jensen wrote:
I modified Csaba's spring coefficients slightly (see attachement) so the
aircraft will rest on the ground without jumping around.
Is this still the case ? I didn't notice,
Not with the gear down, I didn't
I am one of those who are not enthusiastic about adding weapons to
FlightGear. However, if combat capability is added, I think we would
need to limit its scope.
The only limit that should be in place would be a client control that
would ignore physical effects and would not display visual
Suggested Solution #1 - DFMP is server driven and server coordinated:
The dogfighting MP (DFMP) should be server driven (thanks to Lethe for the
insight into this direction) and server coordinated. ?Clients should send
user input information to the server and let the server calculate where
thing a 2 year old boy is going to do the first time he sees some longish
rigid toy to play with ... of course he's going to pick it up and point it
an someone and say bang, bang, bang.
Give 'em a P90. They're kid sized. :) (See Gunslinger Girls)
So I think we can debate nature vs. nurture
Right. Online combat and Chess have two things in common. First, they're
both forms of one on one combat and secondly, nobody ever dies from
either. Actually, online combat would be safer than Chess I think. You'd
never have to worry about playing some nutjob that just might try to bash
I heavily doubt. The simple fact that already these small kids are so
much influenced by depiction of war/crime, that they consider taking
the flute for a rifle (even resp. especially if it's just a game) as
common practice, should scare us - and certainly this doesn't justify
turning
On Fri, 11 May 2007, Martin Spott wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
Horsepucky. Combat in Flight Gear would _never_ be a shoot-em game.
Virtual != Real. EVER. If your little linoleum lizard can't understand
that, it's YOUR fault. Don't nanny-state me because you can't grow a
pair.
Hey
coupled closely to provide integrated sensory
cues 6 These systems shall respond to abrupt
pitch, roll and yaw inputs at the pilot's position
within 150/300 milliseconds of the time, but not
before the time, when the airplane would respond
under the same conditions. [...]
Uh, 300 ms
Martin, the 300ms figure is really only applicable to a Level A simulator
which is basically equivalent to a cockpit procedures trainer with no
visuals.
Ok - that one makes sense. On the other hand, any type of 'tricky' VFR
flight with 300 ms delay, I'd expect even with 150 ms would ruin
On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Tim Moore wrote:
You don't have to provide sources with the binaries to comply with the GPL,
you just have to make them available if the a recipient of the binary asks
for them. In this case company A better have a plan in place for when an
eventual paying customer asks
In my opinion this planned change would be an incredibly bad
move, and would almost have to be seen as the destruction of
the property system. So let me repeat: I strongly object.
I guess it boils down to whether or not the benefit gained outweighs the
down side.
What benefit does the
On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Curtis Olson -- Sunday 05 April 2009:
Without seeing anything so far that I would consider a compelling
argument against, I vote for giving Tim the green light here.
Developer convenience has almost always been a good enough reason
in the past.
On Sat, 9 May 2009, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Erik Hofman -- Saturday 09 May 2009:
The downside of this code is that it is not 100% validating (so
it might accept xml syntax errors where expat didn't) and it
doesn't support DTD's.
Hmm ... so it's sloppier *and* slower, but *maybe* increases
PS: http://www.ohloh.net/p/flightgear/contributors?page=1
He's ehofman. I don't find you on the list.
Good thing you pointed that out, I never would've known otherwise. :|
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
OpenQM - A Multi-Value
the last few panels I need for the
cockpit. I want to get at least two done before I start cutting material
for the Grob 115 cockpit design that I'm working on for Jon. That one
will end up being the Series Two.
Gene Buckle wrote:
Were you born a complete jerk or is this something you learned
The thrust reversers require that you go to idle power to engage them.
However, after that you can run the power back up. In the real aircraft
there is no indication that the reversers are on. This is because the
reverser lever is attached to the throttle arm for each engine. To
activate
There are reverse REV indications in the cockpit located above the N1
gauges and digital readout window on the EICAS display. To deploy the
Is that indication present on the -200 series? If so, I'd never noticed
it. :) That's the only model I have experience with (specifically the
The info was only for 737's with glass. Imagine the mechanical stuff
and sequencing is the same, but the cockpit displays could be totally
different for older models, even non-existent as Gene pointed out.
Ahh, ok. I'll have to see if I've got a 737 N1 indicator I can tear down
and see if
On Wed, 20 May 2009, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
needs to be fixed there. Not exactly my domain, though I coud, of course, look
into that. (I'm just not too keen to do boring stuff after the recent
arguments.
The project might still decide to go the wrong way, and then I'd feel sorry
for
every
I'm not aware of such data within the FlightGear project, but I
think
project magenta has some in their navdata download section yet
I have no clue about their license and the scope of their collection.
If there's some available under a compatible license, I would love
some to
All valid points but irrelevant for the GPL. It is already possible to
connect proprietary software to FlightGear using the generic binary
(socket) protocol handler, but that doesn't violate the GPL. Plug-in
interfaces tend to do because they are considered 'part of the program'
by the GPL.
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Curtis Olson wrote:
Wow, that's perfect, exactly what I was hoping for !!!
I made a small change in your proposed configuration to map the
target-lat/lon/elevation path to /sim/input/click so the camera
automatically stays fixed on anything you click on in the view. I
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Jon Stockill wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
Would it be possible to place the new view into a window instead of
having a dedicated view? That would allow you to have an instrument panel
with a blank cut-out that could hold this newscam/FLIR window.
AFAIK we're currently
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Martin Spott wrote:
Jon Stockill wrote:
AFAIK we're currently limited to 1 camera, which would mean you'd need 2
instances of FlightGear in order to get the 2 different views.
The file FlightGear/docs-mini/README.multiscreen explains how to add
additional cameras,
On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Curtis Olson -- Thursday 23 July 2009:
The capabilities and reconfigurability of FlightGear is amazing.
... and have just (needlessly) been damaged by the vector property
abomination. Now we get properties that are no longer accessible in
all the
And, _if_ the (already cited) parameter to define the coordinates of
the view origin works as expected, then you're almost there you
just have to get rid of the window border - for example by retiring the
window manager. This alltogether would be an interesting excercise -
I'll try
I am not sure if this is it (scroll down to see a screenshot):
http://flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2t=2985p=26114
Now that's nearly the exact thing I was talking about. Thanks for the
link!
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
One thing we have to consider with rear view mirrors is that we don't
currently have the ability to flip the display for the mirror affect.
Does OSG have that as a built-in feature by chance?
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME -
On Fri, 21 Aug 2009, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
http://frbouvi.free.fr/flightsim/fgfs-paris-cvs-20090821.png
Wow.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses,
On Fri, 28 Aug 2009, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
Hi all,
I'm not that frequently on the multiplayer network but I heard this
feature request on IRC. This patch to Nasal/multiplayer.nas adds an
ignore checkbox to each player entry in the pilot list. Once checked MP
chat messages from that
Finally camping at the Runway starting point will most likely upset any
ATC. This way people might begin to take care not to stand in the way.
You'll need something to combat that with people that do it on purpose.
I would suggest extending Anders mute player function to not only ignore
text
Would it or could it be possible to reload a protocol file as the sim is
running.
I'll second this one. I'm working on adding FG support to RJGlass and the
little tweaks are killing me with 30+ second cycle times. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one
I've confirmed this change to work properly with the generic protocol
and hope it doesn't affect any other protocols either. But it might be a
good idea to test them out now.
Thanks Eric!!
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME -
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009, James Turner wrote:
This:
Just want to ask developers: is it possible to make ILS/LOC
establishing radius more realistic?
What we have now in FG? You can establish ILS/LOC anywere you are if
you are in n-kilometers over airport. In real life ATC asks pilots:
Report
On Fri, 18 Sep 2009, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
Hi there,
I found a problematic forum topic on planning an MP event, by which I really
got hurt at least.
http://www.flightgear.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=10t=5761
The plan of the event is to simulate the bombing mission against both
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009, Victhor Foster wrote:
GTA IV sucks. Even if you have an IBM Roadrunner, it'll lag. It's very
badly designed (as with all Rockstar games) ;)
Besides, GTA IV is completely fictional, but the MP event is *loosely*
based on a real, tragic, event. I was going to join it, just
You have my full support on this, Tat.
To those who say , its just a game, get over it
1) It's a sim
It's a simulation game. Is it used for serious research? You bet!
However, it's also used as entertainment.
2) We are talking about the greatest mass murder of civilians in a
single act in
Tasteless? Oh probably. But then again, so is Grand Theft Auto IV.
It's a game. Get over it.
Hey Gene,
I know you've been around long enough that if you spent 30 seconds pondering
your answer, you could probably come up with a little bit better one?
Flip it around ... can you
Tasteless? Oh probably. But then again, so is Grand Theft Auto IV.
It's a game. Get over it.
g.
I am, and have been, against the militarization of flightgear in
general. I'm depressed by the seeming growing number of people who want
to push flightgear into a game and wargame
On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, dave perry wrote:
On 12/01/2009 11:38 AM, John Denker wrote:
On 12/01/2009 11:19 AM, Heiko Schulz wrote:
To your note: So the c172p has now:
-struts animation
The reported bug
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/htm/bug-list.htm#bug-x1768
concerns the nutcracker,
FlightGear is a open-source flight simulator that was started in 2006.
1996. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
On Thu, 17 Dec 2009, Martin Spott wrote:
Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:
http://flightprosim.com/screenshots/SNAG-0281.jpg
In the meantime the link has already been replaced with another
screenshot - still based on copyrighted material
Holy cow, I'm impressed to see this guy is managing to
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Here's the thing. FlightGear uses a gui widget set that is implemented on
top of OpenGL. This has many advantages from a portability standpoint and
from the standpoint of integrating with window systems. Pui doesn't have
every feature under the sun,
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Ron Jensen wrote:
small, lean, mean, and written on top of OpenGL which makes life *much*
easier for us.
Would it be possible (or even reasonable?) to strip out the GUI portion of
plib (essentially divorcing it from the bits that are un-needed/wanted)?
The idea being
On Fri, 29 Jan 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
pui already is a separate distinct library within plib. It depends on some
central utility stuff, but that's about it as far as I know. So it is
pretty stripped down and separate already.
Curt.
Given that, would it make sense to use it as the
I think that what I'm looking for is behavior similar to QT
http://qt.nokia.com/ which I user quite often.
I am sorry and apologize for using the word sucks.
Pete, the problem is that QT doesn't live in the same graphics Space as
FlightGear does. In order to make it work, all the commands
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010, Tim Moore wrote:
As was explained to me on IRC, this is already a solved problem: Qt widgets
can be drawn into OpenGL buffers. That doesn't change the fact that it would
be a great deal of work to port our GUI to Qt, and it would introduce a
very large external
On Sat, 30 Jan 2010, Martin Spott wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
Assuming that _something_ should be done with the GUI as it stands now,
what would be more effective, porting the whole thing to Qt or updating
Pui to address any deficiencies that it has - at least with regard to
FlightGear?
Two
On Mon, 8 Feb 2010, James Sleeman wrote:
Heiko Schulz wrote:
Just for those who wants to know what's going on in the flight sim world:
Outerra is a new 3d-engine for seamless planet rendering.
Wow, the video on the page: http://outerra.blogspot.com/ is amazing if
it's real time.
That's
involved people behave as if the primary target of their involvement is
to alienate contributors over to their very own private collection of
models (there's more than just one single prominent case for such
effort).
You, see, the topic is not _that_ easy to deal with, especially
because a)
On Mon, 15 Feb 2010, Pete Morgan wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
No, but its considered part of flightgear as a platform, no wiki
== no info. mpservers fall in same category almost.
Note that it's flightgear-bugs, not
anything-that-has-anything-to-do-with-flightgear-except-the-actual-simulator
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010, Alex Perry wrote:
Pete, perhaps we need to create a separate queue for
flightgear-usability-bugs-that-gene-doesnt-care-about.
I'll ignore the snark and point out that a wiki problem is not, under any
circumstances whatsoever a flightgear usability issue. Unless of course
On Tue, 16 Feb 2010, leee wrote:
On Monday 15 Feb 2010, Gene Buckle wrote:
On Sun, 14 Feb 2010, Alex Perry wrote:
Pete, perhaps we need to create a separate queue for
flightgear-usability-bugs-that-gene-doesnt-care-about.
I'll ignore the snark and point out that a wiki problem
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010, Alan Teeder wrote:
Maybe it's time to use what's already there?
One problem which springs to mind is that there must be many same name files
(e.g. HSI.xml and its related HSI.ac) which are specific to one aircraft and
are in fact entirely different.
These will need to
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010, leee wrote:
On Wednesday 10 Mar 2010, Martin Spott wrote:
leee wrote:
On Wednesday 10 Mar 2010, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
That might provide some idea of how much of an issue this is,
though obviously doesn't address non-CVS aircraft.
This is exactly the sort of think I'd
http://home.att.net/~m--sandlin/bug.htm
This gent is having some issues getting an accurate flight model for his
gliders in X-Plane. Apparently cruise speed is 20kts. Anyone care to
give this a shot?
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Pete Morgan wrote:
Has/Does FlightGear participate ?
http://google-opensource.blogspot.com/2010/03/google-summer-of-code-applications-now.html
Curt, could the lack of enthusiasm been more due to the short timeframe
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Gene Buckle ge...@deltasoft.com wrote:
Curt, could the lack of enthusiasm been more due to the short timeframe
than anything else? AFAIK, the GSoC participants are thinking about their
entry *months* in advance
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Is it worth setting up a GOSC wiki page to start organizing our thoughts and
possible volunteers? If we wait on this we'll very likely have a repeat of
this year when next year's deadline comes around. Several people have
written expressing support
On Fri, 19 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
A good mail reader can straighten it all out ... :-)
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Gene Buckle wrote:
I would think so, yes.
The first thing we can teach them is how not to top post. :)
*facepalm*
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 1:15 AM, Michael Sgier wrote:
Hi Curt
are you, or someone else, working on integrating the new apt.dat format as
of x-plane 9?
A few of us have been in correspondence with Ben Supnik from time to time,
but as far as I know,
On Tue, 23 Mar 2010, Martin Spott wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
Is the 850 spec considered the new apt.dat format?
Yup, at least it's the most recent public spec. See:
http://data.x-plane.com/designers.html#Formats
Thanks Martin, that's what I thought.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Fred is that only in the CVS or also in 2.0. All working?
This code is in 2.0.0. But as far as I know, the scenery tools are not
ready, and can't generate airports from that format
WED (World Editor) from X-Plane can. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Tim Moore wrote:
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 2:53 PM, Gene Buckle ge...@deltasoft.com wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Martin Spott wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Fred is that only in the CVS or also in 2.0. All working?
This code
On Wed, 24 Mar 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Yes ... the less paying work I do, the more my wife complains; and the less
FlightGear work I do, the more all of you complain. :-) One way or another
there's always someone beating me up on any given day. :-)
You could remind her that not only do we
On Fri, 26 Mar 2010, Roland Haeder wrote:
But like Curt stated before: This has a very big downside, like every
medal has (remember, medals have two sides...) a backside. :( And that
one is also very clear: Do we, no better does Curt want to put his
project into the hand of Google who offers
On Wed, 31 Mar 2010, Pete Morgan wrote:
comment please.. need cool list ..
http://fg-master.appspot.com/
and its yes its hard coded and statick atmo.. ;-)
It looks fantastic Pete. Thanks for doing the work. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Innis Cunningham wrote:
Hi
I have tried to help with FG for about 7 years but after installing
FG 2.0 I give up.
As I am not a computer programmer I am not able to help with
coding so I tried to help with model building and AI and scenery.
With FG2.0 it would appear
Some time ago I ran across this thread:
http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/2967421/Free_sourse_flight_sim_flightg.html#Post2967421
I'd to be able to rationally explain to these folks that while FlightGear
might not be up to FSX in the eye-candy department, it essentially wipes
the
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Martin Spott wrote:
Gene Buckle wrote:
I'd like to build as comprehensive list as possible that shows all the
various professional educational uses users of FlightGear.
Good idea - it's just that I'm slightly uncertain if all those people
who are involved
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
http://outerra.blogspot.com/2010/05/integrating-vector-data-roads.html
That is just amazing. TerraGear should do that. :)
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The
On Sun, 4 Jul 2010, Melchior FRANZ wrote:
* Melchior FRANZ -- Sunday 13 June 2010:
The main changes in v0.2 will be [...]
... gradients and screws, so far. Drawing a screw is as simple as
a.at(0, -30).screw(0.12). This updated example has been drawn by
a still quite simple torque.py driver
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010, willie wrote:
To me, most of Debug should be Advanced but I got outvoted in the
democracy that is IRC on that one so it stayed as Debug :-)
Advanced Debug? *runs*
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
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
On Sat, 16 Oct 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Gene,
I'm a little confused by these emails. As best as I can tell they simply
report that nothing has changed in git. Do we really need this posted to
flightgear-devel?
$ git whatchanged --no-abbrev -M --pretty=raw
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Oh dear ...
http://www.noswearing.com/dictionary
I was going to say that we could probably do a pretty good job at coming up
with a list ourselves, then I saw this site and realized I'm a complete
novice ...
A filter like this belongs in the client
On Tue, 19 Oct 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Gene Buckle wrote:
A filter like this belongs in the client machine, not the server.
It's not the job of a multi-player server to provide nanny services. If
the end user doesn't want to see adult language, they're
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
On 20 Oct 2010, at 18:10, Nathanael Rebsch wrote:
In that case you bandwidth payload for no good reason.
No worse than at present. As I said earlier, I would also put a filter on the
sender to filter the casual profanity and make our expected
On Fri, 22 Oct 2010, James Turner wrote:
F15, mirage2000, F18, RafaleB
all these aircraft have 'realistic' HUDs that need to be converted
to new syntax; in each case the HUDs are very simple, so could also be
expanded, if there's any real-world data to go on.
James, with regard to
I've gotten the SimGear build working for the x64 target, but FlightGear
is still giving me problems:
D:\FGFSHudson\FlightGear\projects\VC90msbuild FlightGear.sln
/p:Configuration=Release /p:Platform=x64 /m
Microsoft (R) Build Engine Version 3.5.30729.4926
[Microsoft .NET Framework,
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Hi Gene,
The x64 platform is only available in the Professional Edition of VS2008.
Did you manage to build the solution inside the IDE ?
Yes, and yes. (I'm an MSDN subscriber)
Here's the resulting binaries that I got from building within the
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Google is your friend :
http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/324846/the-resolvevcprojectoutput-task-failed-unexpectedly-when-building-projects-in-parallel-msbuild
Try the command :
msbuild FlightGear.sln
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Le 06/11/2010 05:31, Gene Buckle a écrit :
On Fri, 5 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Google is your friend :
http://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/details/324846/the-resolvevcprojectoutput-task-failed-unexpectedly-when-building
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, James Turner wrote:
On 6 Nov 2010, at 09:27, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
The x64 build is now available from the build server and I changed what it
made available to include all the .exe files. I updated the win32 build
to include all the .exes as well.
Did you consider
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Le 06/11/2010 11:03, Frederic Bouvier a écrit :
BTW: I will update the 3rd party archive in the next days, maybe
including gettext
I updated the 3rdparty archives :
On Sat, 6 Nov 2010, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
- James Turner zakal...@mac.com a écrit :
On 6 Nov 2010, at 16:22, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
Now that I updated the vs2008 projects, all win32/x64 build should
fail until you update the 3rdparties. Then the msgfmt tool used to
compile the
Fred, if you'd like me to add you as an admin on the Hudson server, send
me a note to ge...@deltasoft.com with what you'd like your username and
initial password to be.
g.
--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The
On Sun, 7 Nov 2010, James Turner wrote:
On 7 Nov 2010, at 18:58, Durk Talsma wrote:
I have a gut feeling we might just have chatted about this; but anyways,
after December 15 (approximately), My immediate workload is settling down a
bit, and hoping that we may pull a build off of the
FPS is a nuisance, indeed, but boycotting The FlightGear Project just
as a means to hurt FPS doesn't buy us anything, I'd say. If we really
aim at doing anything wrt. FPS, then we'd probably better care about
getting our desolate PR department into better shape
This is the key right
http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/SimGear-Win32/ws/projects\VC90\SimGear.vcproj;
(default targets) -- FAILED.
Build FAILED.
http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/SimGear-Win32/ws/projects\VC90\SimGear.vcproj;
(default target) (1) -
(Build target) -
On Fri, 12 Nov 2010, Curtis Olson wrote:
Are you able to test local changes? What would happen if you changed line
#203 of simgear/io/raw_socket.cxx to:
setsockopt( handle, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR,
(void *)opt_boolean, sizeof(opt_boolean) );
In other words, insert (void
1 - 100 of 287 matches
Mail list logo
