John Denker wrote:
> On 02/21/2010 01:25 PM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > I think you may be looking at an out-of-date version of
> > the getstart manual.
>
> I don't think so. "cvs up" says my copy is already up to
> date. The log includes updates through 28 Jan 2010. The
> passages I quoted earlier were quoted from this version.
OK - I thought you might be looking at the one checked into
data/docs/, which is now out of date.
> In order to compile getstart.pdf from sources required 16
> patches, and even after that it compiles with 96 errors and
> 32 warnings, but it does compile and I do look at it.
Hmmmm. On my system it doesn't require any patches, and
I recently had to create a completely fresh build environment on
my new laptop, so there shouldn't be any strange hacks that I've
forgotten about. There are a large number of warnings during
the compile (mainly over-full boxes), but I don't need to do any
patching.
I suspect that the instructions we provide for doing the build may
be deficient.
What specific problems do you see?
> > for the --fdm option, we now have the following text:
> >
> > "Select the core flight model. Options are jsb, larcsim, yasim,
> > magic, balloon, external, pipe, ada, null. This option can normally
> > be ignored, as the -aircraft option will set the FDM correctly."
> >
> > I think that is sufficient for most users.
>
> That is unlikely to be sufficient for any user who wants to
> actually _use_ those options.
Users who want to use the --fdm option are not the target audience
for the manual at present.
The getstart manual is a work in progress, but generally targetted at
new to intermediate users who can happily ignore this option.
We have some way to go before the manual documents such advanced
options.
What is really required in a description of the inter-relation of the FDM,
Mode, -set.xml file etc. but I think that really belongs in an aircraft
manual. Which has still to be written.
> Just because something is allowed by the command-line syntax
> checker doesn't mean it actually works. Most of the FDM
> sub-options don't actually work, and were probably never intended
> to work.
>
> The users would be better off if we either
> a) change the code to conform to the documentation, which seems
> unlikely, or
> b) change the documentation to conform to what the code actually
> does.
Feel free to send through a patch, though the briefer the better.
> ===========================================================
>
> I checked what happens when the aforementioned FDMs are applied
> to the default c172p:
<snip>
> external = synonym for null
This surprises me somewhat, though I'm not sure what difference I expected. :)
-Stuart
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Download Intel® Parallel Studio Eval
Try the new software tools for yourself. Speed compiling, find bugs
proactively, and fine-tune applications for parallel performance.
See why Intel Parallel Studio got high marks during beta.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-sw-dev
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
