Seamus Thomas Carroll writes:
Can you direct me to where i can find HitList::fgCurrentElevation()? i
have run grep on simgear and flightgear plus searched in google and
I still cant find mention of this function.
FGFS_SRC / Scenery / HitList
Norman
John Barrett wrote:
Here is a quick and dirty 1st cut at a wire protocol definition, and some
requirements for the message handling classes that will implement the
protocol
Unless there are objections, byte order is little endian, and floats are intel FPU standard (ok -- i'm making it easy on the
Martin Spott wrote:
David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/5/03 at 1:38 PM John Barrett wrote:
I'm aware of the basic raw multiplayer and the OLK code (which I peeked at
and am still trying to figure out the details)
and what is the 3rd one ?? Dont see anything in CVS for it..
I think
David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 11/5/03 at 1:38 PM John Barrett wrote:
I'm aware of the basic raw multiplayer and the OLK code (which I peeked at
and am still trying to figure out the details)
and what is the 3rd one ?? Dont see anything in CVS for it..
I think that was probably
John Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless there are objections, byte order is little endian, and floats are =
intel FPU standard (ok -- i'm making it easy on the PCs that will likely =
be used to run display clients :)
I'm not qualified to comment on the float size, others may do. But I'd
Seamus Carrol got the same problem - now I am getting it too! (src, simgear
and plib all cvs versions).
Did anybody manage to fix it?
Melchior and Andy will appreciate that this is a HUGE advance in the build,
thanks to their patient explanations of CVS and other mysteries.
Thanks,
R
-
On 11/6/03 at 2:28 PM Seamus Thomas Carroll wrote:
I now have cubes and cylinders of various colours moving around in the
flightgear world. Currently I specify a starting lon, lat and the roaming
distance in meters in either the lon, lat direction. I can have about 100
vehicles being
Did you get your ssgCullAndDraw error fixed?
I have the same thing!
Tks, R
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
I was working on the directory layout and autoconf for my server module, and
the CVS app I'm using requires that everything be added to the repository
before a patch can be created -- without thinking, I added src/Server, and
the cvs guest account allowed me to do it !!
Doing patches is a new
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Norman Vine) [2003.11.06 05:51]:
Melchior FRANZ writes:
* Norman Vine -- Thursday 06 November 2003 10:10:
John Barrett writes:
primary goal: blow them outa the sky !!
FWIW Historicaly FlightGear has resisted being a Military SIM.
(actually resisted
David Megginson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Paul Surgeon writes:
0.9.3 - The one with the nice ready to run Windows installer. It's
the 172 with the 3D cockpit and nice yellow tints on the wings. :)
That's pretty ancient. Our current 172 looks a fair bit better.
U... that
Jim Wilson writes:
That's pretty ancient. Our current 172 looks a fair bit better.
U... that release is less than two weeks old ;-).
I'm losing track of release numbers, then, but the clunky 172 model
with the yellow tint on wings has not been our default for a long
time. Maybe he
Is there a README, FAQ, or manual on making instruments for a panel
and/or creating the panel itself?
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
- Original Message -
From: Cameron Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To the folks that want combat, work real hard to support a
--with-combat=no option, or you're gonna get shot down real fast. ;-)
--
Already there and them some :)
I'm working up the protocol base classes at the moment,
On Friday, 7 November 2003 06:39, Nick Coleman wrote:
As a counterpoint, I would like to request that this either not take
priority, or that it be an option in the configure stage. I want fast
framerates as the priority. For me, this is a _flight_ sim and I don't
see the point of eyecandy. (
David Megginson wrote:
Jim Wilson writes:
That's pretty ancient. Our current 172 looks a fair bit better.
U... that release is less than two weeks old ;-).
I'm losing track of release numbers, then, but the clunky 172 model
with the yellow tint on wings has not been our default for
Paul Surgeon wrote:
On Friday, 7 November 2003 06:39, Nick Coleman wrote:
As a counterpoint, I would like to request that this either not take
priority, or that it be an option in the configure stage. I want fast
framerates as the priority. For me, this is a _flight_ sim and I don't
see the
Suggestion: for debugging purposes (if nothing else) it would be
useful to have this command:
fgfs --version
also spit out info on other pertinent version numbers, e.g. for:
plib
simgear
jsbsim
yasim
etc.
JSBSim has this available in a header file, and IIRC it is also
available in a function
Bring on the eye candy :) and a good config gui to control how much candy
you eat (along with everything else that a config gui should do -- joystick
calibration, screen resolution, sounds and sound volume, load/save config)
I personally have a problem with relying on a seperate project to create
Paul Surgeon [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
I would love to have a poll on this topic to see how many people would like
some eye-candy and those that don't care much about it.
If no one want's any visual improvements in FlightGear then I better not
waste my time.
There are several people working on
* Jon S Berndt -- Friday 07 November 2003 19:15:
Suggestion: for debugging purposes [...]
JSBSim has this available in a header file, and IIRC it is also
available in a function call.
... and not only that:
$ ident `which fgfs`
m. ;-)
BTW: you can easily invent new ident keywords,
- Original Message -
From: Jim Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are several people working on this stuff and more is certainly
welcome.
If you keep looking I think you'll find some pretty amazing visual work
already in FlightGear. Have you headed north from the default runway yet
On Friday 07 November 2003 12:10 pm, Jon S Berndt wrote:
Is there a README, FAQ, or manual on making instruments for a panel
and/or creating the panel itself?
Try F1
Jon
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Surgeon writes:
On Friday, 7 November 2003 06:39, Nick Coleman wrote:
I disagree with this assessment. I think lower spec machines should be
able to run a _flight_ sim and shouldn't be excluded just for the sake
of eyecandy.
I don't for a minute think that lower speced machines
Obviously FG supports alpha channels in textures used for 3D objects like
trees but is the same true for ground textures?
i.e. Can FG do multitexturing (blend two textures together based on an alpha
channel)?
Thanks
Paul
___
Flightgear-devel
On Saturday, 8 November 2003 02:08, David Luff wrote:
And with a .za address, you might like to dig out FALA's runways from their
trench ;-))
Haha!
Not only FALA but FAJS and many others too.
I found the approaches rather exciting although not very realistic. :)
Paul
Paul Surgeon wrote:
Obviously FG supports alpha channels in textures used for 3D objects like
trees but is the same true for ground textures?
i.e. Can FG do multitexturing (blend two textures together based on an alpha
channel)?
Not yet. I've been playing a bit with the idea to make the water
I am thinking back as hard as I can and I cant pin point how things began
working. I was having problems with CVS not updating files I had modified
with cvs update -d -P. I downloaded a brand new cvs for flightgear and
it began to compile (and maybe simgear).
HTH,
Seamus
On Fri, 7 Nov
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 09:30 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 00:08:30 +
From: David Luff [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Some thoughts and ideas (LONG)
To: FlightGear developers discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message-ID: [EMAIL
Nick Coleman wrote:
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:46 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Preface
==
I would like to see the sim become more friendly to casual users
especially on the eye candy side
On Sat, 8 Nov 2003 09:30 am, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:31:29 -0500
From: John Barrett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Some thoughts and ideas (LONG)
To: FlightGear developers discussions
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: priority on fast
On Saturday, 8 November 2003 01:05, Nick Coleman wrote:
totally agree that eyecandy should be able to be included, as long as
it is a configurable option for those who don't want it,either in the
make stage or in the startup stage.
What about in the menu system?
Switch it off and it stays off
Paul Surgeon wrote:
On Saturday, 8 November 2003 01:05, Nick Coleman wrote:
totally agree that eyecandy should be able to be included, as long as
it is a configurable option for those who don't want it,either in the
make stage or in the startup stage.
What about in the
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (John Barrett) [2003.11.07 11:12]:
- Original Message -
From: Cameron Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To the folks that want combat, work real hard to support a
--with-combat=no option, or you're gonna get shot down real fast. ;-)
--
Already there and them
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jon S Berndt) [2003.11.07 12:16]:
Suggestion: for debugging purposes (if nothing else) it would be
useful to have this command:
fgfs --version
also spit out info on other pertinent version numbers, e.g. for:
plib
simgear
jsbsim
yasim
etc.
JSBSim has this
Cameron Moore writes:
In case you are misunderstanding what I am talking about, let me
clarify. Noone (that I know of) is opposed to multiplayer/multipilot
capabilities being in FG. What we are debating is combat -- ie.
modelling projectiles such as bombs, bullets, and rockets and their
36 matches
Mail list logo
