On 07/06/2007 01:12 AM, Pigeon wrote:
For quite a while I've been using git to keep track of FlightGear
files. Using git instead of CVS is like having a sports car instead
of a skateboard.
All good :)
:-)
I notice you're hosting git over http, which is usually much slower
than
Hello Sebastian!
Sebastian Bechtold wrote:
Tim Moore wrote:
So, I don't mean to be discouraging because I think this is ultimately
the right approach in terms of bumping up terrain detail and
implementing terrain and texture LOD, but you have a lot of hacking
ahead of you.
Then it should
Sebastian Bechtold wrote:
Your thread title is misleading,
Sorry, but I don't think so. The title describes my intentions pretty well.
what you really want to do is to add
layers, so to add some geometry drapped around the terrain.
No, I don't I want to do that. I want to do
Hi,
I didn't intend to take part in more threads with you that could
(and most likely would) turn out to be yet another flame war. The
following is really meant to be the opposite, but I assume that
it will fail poorly.
* John Denker -- Friday 06 July 2007:
I'm sure some people will take this
Hi once more!
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
I can assure you that I will provide support to you with everything I
learned about scenery design, file formats and coordinate systems in the
FlightGear world. I will not be able to assist you much in coding, and
specifically not in the area of 3D
Am Freitag 06 Juli 2007 10:19 schrieb Melchior FRANZ:
...
Maybe you should stop by in our IRC channel at some time. It's
usually much more relaxed and friendly there, and it's easier to
clear matters.
I second that. I was quite surprised yesterday :-) Thx
OTOH sometimes it's not an option
Harald JOHNSEN schrieb:
Sebastian Bechtold wrote:
Your thread title is misleading,
Sorry, but I don't think so. The title describes my intentions pretty well.
what you really want to do is to add
layers, so to add some geometry drapped around the terrain.
Heiko Schulz schrieb:
Hi,
the graphic at the end of your steps should be no or
very small problems. To make pseudo aerial
photographs can be done very easy.
Your idea sounds good now - but one curious question I
have: when it really works at runtime, we could do
something like the
Sebastian Bechtold wrote:
Yes, that's true. This might really be something that makes the
implementation a bit more complicated. Currently, I have two
ideas to solve this problem:
1.)
Apply the textures on tile-level. The tiles have a regular rectangular
shape, so you could map one texture on
Hi all,
Today's cvs seems to have solved thru problem of crashes with
traffic-manager when compiled with MSVC8, at least for short runs. My
testing is incomplete, since I have not been able to test for extended
periods, so the longer term memory leak that has been reported may still be
present.
Hi!
Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
The point 1) will give worse ground texture than today if we set the
texture size at 4090^2.
Not necessarily. Currently we have the same basic texture resolution
everywhere. With the approach Sebastian wants to try one could use tiles
of different sizes depending on
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ralf Gerlich wrote:
Hi!
Harald JOHNSEN wrote:
But if the the real problem is those anoying triangle why not simply
delete them ? Frankly we don't care about the geometry in the btg file,
we just need a height field, let just built this
On Friday 06 July 2007 18:03, John Denker wrote:
1) Where I'm coming from: Different people are interested in different
parts of FlightGear. I consider it a strength of the project that it
can be put to disparate purposes.
I'm sure we all agree about that, anyway.
1a) As for me
On 07/06/2007 01:08 PM, AJ MacLeod wrote:
These bugs actually have been worked out already.
Excellent!
The necessary fixes have
been made and with Maik's last patch (which was posted to the dev list, I'm
pretty sure) I'm not aware of any significant problems. Maybe you could try
1) Where I'm coming from: Different people are interested in different
parts of FlightGear. I consider it a strength of the project that it
can be put to disparate purposes.
1a) As for me personally, and for more than a few others, there is
interest in using it as a complex-aircraft
On Fri 6 July 2007 01:41, John Denker wrote:
On 07/05/2007 06:57 PM, gh.robin wrote:
When i opened that topic , it was to know if we could hope any FG update
to get an altitude instrument which can be able to indicate more than
61000 ft.
We have had a lot of discussion on it , but
Am Freitag 06 Juli 2007 19:27 schrieb John Denker:
It's been ten days now with no CVS-commit nor even any
discussion of a CVS-commit AFAICT.
That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you using?
Thomas
--
PhD Student, Dept. Animal Physiology, HU Berlin
Tel +49 30 2093
Harald JOHNSEN schrieb:
Sebastian Bechtold wrote:
Yes, that's true. This might really be something that makes the
implementation a bit more complicated. Currently, I have two
ideas to solve this problem:
1.)
Apply the textures on tile-level. The tiles have a regular rectangular
shape,
On 07/06/2007 01:50 PM, Thomas Förster wrote:
That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you using?
CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th).
Has something happened since then?
With this version I observe:
-- Middle marker audio is strongly shifted.
-- ATIS
Am Freitag 06 Juli 2007 20:33 schrieb John Denker:
On 07/06/2007 01:50 PM, Thomas Förster wrote:
That's definitely not true (generally spoken). Which branch are you
using?
CVS OSG, up to date as of late yesterday (the 5th).
Has something happened since then?
Hmm, rereading your post this
On Friday 06 July 2007 18:27, John Denker wrote:
It's been ten days now with no CVS-commit nor even any
discussion of a CVS-commit AFAICT.
That's probably about right. I and a few others on IRC were testing various
patches for Maik for a while... I thought that the results of that made it to
On 07/06/2007 02:56 PM, Thomas Förster wrote:
Hmm, rereading your post this probably was a misunderstanding. You were
referring to doppler effect related commits, weren't you?
Yes. Perhaps I clipped too much context; I thought
the Subject: line would be sufficient contex. Sorry.
To
Hi John,
I posted the patch which should fix your problem on June 1st, 22:16
(German time).
(If you do not have archived this EMail: just drop me a note, I will
email it to you).
I think the patch will be commited soon. But I am modifying files, which
are not mine, therefore it is ok, to give
Sebastian Bechtold schrieb:
..
If possible, I'd like to try to do this
without
doing such further changes. I'd like to avoid a plan where one feature
requires another, and this one requires another again, and so on. The more
you change, the higher is the risk of unplanned side effects and
Hi,
ups. Is it really July? Please replace June by July in my last post.
Thanks to John.
Maik
Maik Justus schrieb am 06.07.2007 21:23:
Hi John,
I posted the patch which should fix your problem on June 1st, 22:16
(German time).
(If you do not have archived this EMail: just drop me a note,
I wrote
Sent: 06 July 2007 12:56
To: 'FlightGear developers discussions'
Subject: [Flightgear-devel] Today's CVS
Hi all,
Today's cvs seems to have solved thru problem of crashes with
traffic-manager when compiled with MSVC8, at least for short
runs. My testing is incomplete, since
I got the .diff from Maik Justus.
I merged it into the _Sport Model_.
It works fine; ATIS and marker beacons are no longer Doppler
shifted.
In addition to the two files patched by the .diff, I had
to make some trivial and obvious edits in two other files,
to bring them into compliance with the
Hi --
I just added a feature to the _Sport Model_.
This has been on my wish list for a long, long time. I
implemented it this morning, and I've been having quite
a lot of fun trying it out.
Here's the scenario: Suppose you are on an instrument
approach. You know the weather is marginal, but
On Fri 6 July 2007 01:41, John Denker wrote:
On 07/05/2007 06:57 PM, gh.robin wrote:
When i opened that topic , it was to know if we could hope any FG update
to get an altitude instrument which can be able to indicate more than
61000 ft.
We have had a lot of discussion on it , but
Hi all!
Currently the joystick throttle axis and the mouse throttle control apply
any throttle change to all engines. In my work on LZ-129 Hindenburg I
discovered that I need to be able to quickly control the engines
individually or in (sub)groups - and I think this ability would be useful
In several places in the code, a conversion is made from
double frequency in MHz to int frequency in tens-of-kHz.
The conversion was done unwisely, i.e. in a way that is
incompatible with the way 25-kHz frequencies are rounded
in near-universal aviation practice ... and, in particular,
as done in
31 matches
Mail list logo
