Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi James, On Wed, 2013-08-21 at 16:08 +0100, James Turner wrote: > > I've put some cash down to buy a cheap PC box > for running Windows+Linux so I can debug these > issues (and a few other Windows ones which are > bugging me). > This is really WONDERFUL news ;=)) MSVC has a very powerful

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi, > Stuart wrote: > Now all we need is someone with enough Windows knowledge to fix the build. the Win32 builds work fine now, only FGRun for Win64 is failing. It builds fine on my machine, but on Jenkins it cannot find two Boost files. ..\..\fgrun\src\wizard_funcs.cxx(38): fatal error C1083

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 21 Aug 2013, at 16:03, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > Now all we need is someone with enough Windows knowledge to fix the > build. I've put some cash down to buy a cheap PC box for running Windows+Linux so I can debug these issues (and a few other Windows ones which are bugging me). Probably won

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On Wed, Aug 21, 2013 at 3:51 PM, James Turner wrote: > On a related note, once the build problem is resolved, could we > generate a full installation RC package for testing? It would make it > easier for testers not familiar with Git to use it, and would be quite > handy for people like myself who

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 21 Aug 2013, at 15:28, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > On a related note, once the build problem is resolved, could we > generate a full installation RC package for testing? It would make it > easier for testers not familiar with Git to use it, and would be quite > handy for people like myself who

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Gijs de Rooy wrote: > Don't have much time today for further troubleshooting unfortunately; should > have some after my last exam tomorrow ;-) Hi Gijs, Have you had the chance to look at this at all, and did Geoff's suggestion help? Do we have any active Win dev

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi Gijs, Yes, it certainly 'looks' that way ;=() I just did a git pull, and I can only produce that SAME link error in my Windows 7 build if I comment out the line - list(APPEND PLATFORM_LIBS "winmm.lib") Then I get what you showed - SimGearCored.lib(timestamp.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolve

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi Geoff, > That can be fixed by adding Winmm.lib to the link... Fred already did that some time ago, right? https://www.gitorious.org/fg/fgrun/commit/d25fad49b73f51459ef2bdaa7e040da8259a02a0 Cheers, Gijs

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi Gijs, That can be fixed by adding Winmm.lib to the link... Like in the fgrun CMakeLists.txt file add - target_link_libraries( fgrun Winmm ) Regards, Geoff. On Thu, 2013-08-15 at 12:54 +0200, Gijs de Rooy wrote: > It seems to fail on building FGRun.exe: > SimGearCore.lib(timestamp.obj) : erro

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

It seems to fail on building FGRun.exe: SimGearCore.lib(timestamp.obj) : error LNK2019: unresolved external symbol __imp__timeGetTime@0 referenced in function "public: void __thiscall SGTimeStamp::stamp(void)" (?stamp@SGTimeStamp@@QAEXXZ) FGRun-Win64-Cmake also fails (unrelated to this release is

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 15 Aug 2013, at 10:50, Gijs de Rooy wrote: > Is http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/Windows-release/ the build that we > should look at? Correct. James -- Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi James, > James wrote: > the biggest obstacle to an RC is getting the Windows build slaves to behave; > if anyone on Windows could look at the Jenkins logs and shed any light, it > would help. Is http://flightgear.simpits.org:8080/job/Windows-release/ the build that we should look at? Cheers,

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 14 Aug 2013, at 21:57, Curtis Olson wrote: > I think the main initial hurdle here is to get the Mac & Windows releases > sorted out on Jenkins (if they aren't already). We've done the code freeze > and branch on schedule so we are mostly down to the mechanics and time of > actually buildi

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

I think the main initial hurdle here is to get the Mac & Windows releases sorted out on Jenkins (if they aren't already). We've done the code freeze and branch on schedule so we are mostly down to the mechanics and time of actually building and pushing the release out the door. Thanks, Curt. O

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi Pat, On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:11 AM, Pat wrote: > One reschedule is a good idea. Would an indefinite delay, with a > promise republishing the schedule by a given date be appropriate or > desirable? An indefinite delay would risk the release never being completed, and we'd be back where we w

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

> I propose pushing out the release by a month. I've got a bit more time > available > for FG right now, but not as much as I did 12 months ago, and it sounds > like > James and Thorsten R are similarly time limited. I think it will take > longer than usual to address any issues found in the R

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 13 Aug 2013, at 21:42, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > I propose pushing out the release by a month. I've got a bit more time > available > for FG right now, but not as much as I did 12 months ago, and it sounds like > James and Thorsten R are similarly time limited. I think it will take > longer

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

> > If we are going to slip the release, we should only do so once :) > > -Stuart > One reschedule is a good idea. Would an indefinite delay, with a promise republishing the schedule by a given date be appropriate or desirable? For example "Due to constraints on our developers' available ti

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote: > Permission granted ;-) > > As everybody seems to be caught in some real life trouble, I can't see a > better way to get the release out than delaying it for a while. > > Would two weeks be enough for everybody? That will get us to the weekend

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Permission granted ;-) As everybody seems to be caught in some real life trouble, I can't see a better way to get the release out than delaying it for a while. Would two weeks be enough for everybody? That will get us to the weekend Aug, 31/Sep 1. Torsten Am 13.08.2013 16:56, schrieb Curti

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

We would need permission from Torsten D, our release manager, but I would also second Thorsten R's proposal to defer the 2.12 release by a week or two. I have been spread very thin this summer with my day job projects and will be out of town myself on the 16-18 of August. I think we should at min

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 13 Aug 2013, at 12:58, Renk Thorsten wrote: > On the risk of making myself really unpopular, but would now be a good time > to defer the release? It seems James is caught in the middle of moving, > Stuart indicated some other private things piling up, I have the maddest > travelling schedu

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On the risk of making myself really unpopular, but would now be a good time to defer the release? It seems James is caught in the middle of moving, Stuart indicated some other private things piling up, I have the maddest travelling schedule I've ever had in my life this fall, and I haven't seen

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

> The release branches exist, and the autobuild is running - someone can > take the source ball or binaries (unfortunately the Windows slave is > down, someone needs to ping Gene) and test it. Slave is up. Has been since about 7am PDT. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 8 Aug 2013, at 15:15, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > Erm...shouldn't there be a RC version released sometime around now, since the > final version will be released in just over a week? > > Unfortunately, I'm in the middle of moving house, so rather busy. The release branches exist, and the a

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Erm...shouldn't there be a RC version released sometime around now, since the final version will be released in just over a week? On Aug 3, 2013 3:50 AM, "James Turner" wrote: > > On 3 Aug 2013, at 04:27, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > > Actually, scratch that; it seems FlightGear allows the --fg-air

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 3 Aug 2013, at 04:27, Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > Actually, scratch that; it seems FlightGear allows the --fg-aircraft switch > to specify multiple root aircraft directories, although the man page needs to > be updated to specify this (it currently says it's only used by UIUC). > I added th

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Actually, scratch that; it seems FlightGear allows the --fg-aircraft switch to specify multiple root aircraft directories, although the man page needs to be updated to specify this (it currently says it's only used by UIUC). Saikrishna Arcot On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 10:24 PM, Saikrishna Arcot wro

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

That might help, or the ability to specify multiple directories for the aircraft, like how it's done with scenery. If need be, I can have just FlightGear for Ubuntu built with a patch to allow multiple directories for aircraft. Saikrishna Arcot On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 6:34 PM, Pat wrote: > Wou

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Would some sort of user data directory help with this? Can this be done on ubuntu? On Thu, 1 Aug 2013 21:16:50 -0500 Saikrishna Arcot wrote: > For what it's worth, I have a > PPAthat > is tracking the 2.12.0 branch that includes the

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

For what it's worth, I have a PPAthat is tracking the 2.12.0 branch that includes the default aircraft and a few other aircraft that can be used by Ubuntu and other distros that use/allow Ubuntu's repos and/or PPAs. However, it installs

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi all, is there any news on release candidates? I think we did find a few serious bugs last year when people tried the RCs, so we'd better start distributing them before the end of this week... Cheers, Gijs

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On 30 Jul 2013, at 21:25, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > James - if it's convenient could you pull this to the 2.12.0 release > branch please. Done. James -- Get your SQL database under version control now! Version control

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Hi James, On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 10:07 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > As an FYI, I'm still working on some final updates to The Manual that > I want to get committed to the 2.12.0 branch. These have now been committed to master (e87379c). James - if it's convenient could you pull this to the 2.12

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 8:38 PM, James Turner wrote: > Hi, > > I've just created the release branches for FG, SG & data (at Torsten's > request, since he's on holiday in the wild, Internet-less north of Sweden). Thanks James. As an FYI, I'm still working on some final updates to The Manual that

Re: [Flightgear-devel] 2.12 is branched

Cool stuff... Got a weekend of so am reviving freeflightsim.org.. got to change servers and have some time.. Is the public release automated.. Eg for me on my freeflightsim.org website.. I want a remote feed to a json file what says new release... If the new version is later that the current versi