Re: [Flightgear-devel] Scenery 1.0.0 coastline is not processed
Hello everyone :) 2008/3/19, Ralf Gerlich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > However, the faulty tiles - tiles which should show only ground where > there should be ocean as well - are bugs, not inaccuracies. I spotted another type of faulty tile : ocean where there should be ground, @ N47°56 W04°07 Check out Quimper's airport (LFRQ) : it's hovering over the sea. I am interested in reports about straight ground tiles in the ocean or > in lakes, as Gerard reported in his original mail: > > Some locations in France (I give lat,long somewhere in the middle of the faulty tile, and an airport nearby) : Near Bordeaux 45.50 , -1.11 (LFCY, LFDK, LFIV) 45.08 , -0.67 (LFDU, LFBD, LFDY) 45.87 , -1.25 (LFCD) Near Brest 47.93 , -4.11 (LFRQ) 48.18 , -4.62 (LFRL) I hope you'll find without too much trouble the bug behind all this. Cheers -- Jocelyn Couetdic - Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GPL Violation?
Hi all, Le samedi 18 novembre 2006 à 19:34 +0100, Christian Mayer a écrit : > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Dene schrieb: > > Hi Curt, thanks for re-affirming that, > > > > I am still a little unsure on some things; > > > > As long as I'm using images in a positive manner then it's OK? who makes > > the judgement call on whether my use is positive or not? > One simple solution would be to add in the images on the website something like "flightgear.org", maybe with a ©. That way : -> the fact that "someone" owns the right to this image is reaffirmed to those who forget it -> "bad" usage like the one that started this thread is less of a concern, since its provides potential buyers the information the flightgear community would like them to know. -> it's easier to be nasty with "bad" users, since using the image without permission is not legal (it's still true without this text, but the rights' owner is unclear). Of course, a license like CC would achieve that and more. -- Jocelyn Couetdic - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] GPL Violation?
Le samedi 18 novembre 2006 à 15:27 -0500, Jim Wilson a écrit : > Andy's suggestion that this is ok because of the publicity value doesn't > detract from the > fraud aspect. Has anyone asked for a copy of the license the seller is > offering "on request"? > The real question we should address is : Does the seller provide the GPL licence in the download, and does he provide, or offer to provide the source code. If he does, he can say whatever he wants on his website/publicity, there is no GPL violation. > In other words you can make a request to the seller to cease his operation, > or you can notify ebay of a violation without having to prove violation. I > am reasonably sure > that Ebay will respect the wishes of anyone who can prove simply that they > hold the > copyright, regardless of the content or wording of the license. They do not > expect you > to be a lawyer, and they will delist almost anything that is contested. > There is a > slight possibility that Ebay has a special policy for GPL license claims, > but I would > doubt that. > Assuming there is no GPL violation, this can only be done by contending to Ebay that the screenshot in the publicity is a copyright violation. (I'm not sure what is the right term in english : rough translation from french of what I mean here is "author rights", which is what covers by default any creative work in french law.) > The only question is then, do you want this seller's auction removed? If you > want to > opinion of project members on this, the my vote would be yes, remove it. So I think that the seller should be contacted to ask him politely if he complies to GPL licence, and to point towards flightgear.org if he wishes to continue to use those screenshots. -- Jocelyn Couetdic - Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] RTT issue with ATI cards (3d clouds)
Hi, I hope I'm posting to the right ml. I tried to find out what was wrong with ATI cards, and the 3d clouds code. For information, my system is a laptop with an ATI Mobility X700 graphics card. I run a debian testing, with a 2.6.16 "home build" kernel, and I use the ATI proprietary driver (fglrx) version 8.27.10. I also have a winXP, with which 3d clouds work well. I use flightgear 0.9.10 I did some quick and dirty debugging in the RenderTexture class (using the TestRenderTexture program), and find out, that the reason it doesn't work, is that neither GLX_SGIX_fbconfig, or GLX_SGIX_pbuffer extensions are supported by the ATI GLX implementation : $ glxinfo name of display: :0.0 display: :0 screen: 0 direct rendering: Yes server glx vendor string: SGI server glx version string: 1.2 server glx extensions: GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_OML_swap_method, GLX_SGI_make_current_read, GLX_SGIS_multisample, GLX_SGIX_hyperpipe, GLX_SGIX_swap_barrier, GLX_SGIX_fbconfig client glx vendor string: ATI client glx version string: 1.3 client glx extensions: GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_ARB_get_proc_address, GLX_ARB_multisample, GLX_ATI_pixel_format_float, GLX_ATI_render_texture GLX version: 1.2 GLX extensions: GLX_EXT_visual_info, GLX_EXT_visual_rating, GLX_EXT_import_context, GLX_ARB_multisample OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc. OpenGL renderer string: MOBILITY RADEON X700 Generic OpenGL version string: 2.0.5946 (8.27.10) OpenGL extensions: [snip] This causes the initialize method of a RenderTexture object to fail quite early on (in _VerifyExtensions()). As a result, the bbcache code returns this during init : "bbcache:Initialize failed, RTT not available for 3D clouds" So here are a few questions : -> I am totally off ? (I have absolutely no background in OpenGl whatsoever). Is there somebody using those ATI driver, who can confirm that those two extensions are not there ? (and that it's not some @#!% driver installation bug on my system) -> If this is indeed the problem, should someone file a ticket to ATI to ask for support of those extensions in coming releases of the drivers ? -> Or should the 3d clouds code be written to use the FramebufferObject, which seems to be (from what I could gather on the net) a replacement for older off-screen rendering and Rendering To Texture using pbuffers extensions. BTW, this GL_EXT_framebuffer_object is supported by the ATI drivers. Regards, -- Jocelyn Couetdic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> - Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
