On 12/17/2008 12:33 AM, James Turner wrote:
> On 17 Dec 2008, at 01:03, Melchior Franz wrote:
>
>> + var KT2MPS = 0.51; # knots to m/s
>> + var MPS2KT = 1 / KT2MPS;
>> +
>> var LB2KG = 0.45359237;# pounds to kilogram
>> var KG2LB = 1 / LB2KG;
>
> Personally I
On 12/16/2008 06:38 AM, Heiko Schulz wrote:
>> 1:: c172p: As of rc2, the model makes weird, unrealistic
>> noises that
>> are presumably supposed to be engine noise, but do not
>> vary in pitch
>> or amplitude in the appropriate way. Real pilots are very
>> sensitive
>> to engine noise.
>
> r
On 12/16/2008 09:54 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> Lets see. Ignoring the manifold pressure and just looking at the
> assertion that an increase in RPM always leads to an increase in
> HORSEPOWER, I did a google image search for RPM vs HORSEPOWER.
OK.
>> This one is particularly interesting, as it sh
A few more opportunities for improvement:
37:: Documentation: As of rc2, data/Docs/FGShortRef.pdf is in dire
need of an update. It bears a 2005 date, and internally refers to
version 0.8.0. For example, it thinks the "space" key (not the "s"
key) runs the starter.
38:: Documentation: As of rc
On 12/16/2008 10:20 AM, James Turner wrote:
> The problem is, what happened a couple of years is irrelevant, in the
> strictest sense of the word: it has zero relation to the present.
Except that the problem continues into the present. Very
recently I submitted a patch. The guy who specifical
On 12/16/2008 03:05 AM, James Turner wrote:
> The dialog box behaviour, is that it explicitly clears out the current
> lat/lon before doing the navaid/fix search, so we get the same
> behaviour from the GUI - at least it's consistent.
>
> My proposed fix is to add a 'base position' or similar
On 12/12/2008 09:36 AM, Durk Talsma asked for bug reports.
So on 12/15/2008 11:20 PM, I sent in some bug reports.
Please don't shoot the messenger.
On 12/16/2008 06:38 AM, Heiko Schulz wrote in part:
> Oh- did I mention that the aircraft is still WIP? Did I? No?
Actually on 12/02/2008 05:14 AM
On 12/16/2008 05:12 AM, I wrote:
>I suspect the RW engine was
> designed to develop 100% power at roughly 27" at 2700 RPM
> (sea level, full throttle). Maybe 28/2700.
Just to clarify: I was thinking of 80 kias.
^^^
That is, 100% power at 27/27
OK, let's back up and take another look at this.
In previous messages -- mine and others -- it has not always
been clear what remarks refer to real-world aircraft and what
remarks refer to the model. Such remarks are OK if we think
the model is faithful to reality, but since it has become
cle
On 12/15/2008 11:43 PM, Ron Jensen wrote:
> As mentioned above, the MAP readings are not a "bug"
Well, then we need to find another word for it.
Perhaps we can call it a counterintuitive, unrealistic,
and undocumented feature.
In effect it is a highly nonlinear "governor" feature.
The real O-32
On 12/12/2008 09:36 AM, Durk Talsma wrote:
> If all goes well, I would like to prepare the final release version next
> Friday.
Wow.
> Until that time please hold back on committing anything risky, and
> give these prereleases a decent workout. Let's try to make this the best
> FlightGear r
On 12/15/2008 04:31 PM, Tom Betka wrote a long note making
a number of good points.
Thanks!
Let me join the discussion here:
> HP = [(2pi)*(Torque)*(RPM)] / 33000 [1]
Right. That's the formula I've been using when quoting
shaft horsepower numbers.
> ...one can easily see that the only
On 12/13/2008 06:16 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> The manual should allow some fairly thorough testing.
OK, good. I reckon thorough testing would be helpful.
As several others have mentioned, before delving too
deeply into the Cessna-specific details, it might be
worthwhile to vet the engine and
On 12/13/2008 02:29 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> You need at least OSG 2.7.3
OK.
And the OSG site seems to be back up.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, in RC2 we have the following
README.OSG file;
>> [This file is mirrored in both the FlightGear and SimGear packages.]
>>
>> You *must* have Open
On 12/12/2008 09:36 AM, Durk Talsma wrote:
> Please find FlightGear 1.99.5-RC2 ready for download. In order to relieve my
> humble server, John Wojnaroski has kindly provided some space on his server
> to
> host the source and base package. Please find the relevant files here:
>
> http://www.l
On 12/09/2008 05:35 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
> John Denker wrote:
>
>> My point here is that most pilots, especially low-time private
>> pilots, [...]
>
> Well, at least your perception of real-life flying which you've been
> demonstrating to us in the past on thi
On 12/01/2008 08:51 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> I thought that one of the C172s had been extensively overhauled and improved
> in the past ... ?
Not recently. Unless the logs are lying to us, the FDM for
the c172r has not changed appreciably since early 2006.
On 12/08/2008 07:24 PM, Tom Betka w
On 12/07/2008 03:50 AM, Martin Spott wrote in part:
> it really
> makes me wonder why you insist on going with the "facts"
What, me, facts? It's just one of my little quirks.
> it really
> makes me wonder why you insist on going with the "facts" even though
> you were unable to provide any,
On 12/06/2008 04:02 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
> In a case like this one I prefer the 'pragmatic' approach of reading a
> manual (if available), determining what its authors consider as being
> "at level" (if they do in some way) and finally to evaluate if we're
> able to make use of it.
> It doesn't
On 12/06/2008 03:25 PM, Martin Spott wrote:
> This is the sole point I'm talking about: Apparently, even though 'we'
> have "original" drawings of the entire airframe, still none of us has
> authoritative information at his hands how it is supposed to be
> properly positioned 'at level'. This is t
On 12/01/2008 07:52 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> One should look at the angle of attack value at cruise and see if it's as
> expected.
True.
> The question seems to be whether the flight dynamics is wrong, or
> whether then aircraft is drawn right.
Agreed, that's the right question.
The answer i
On 11/27/2008 12:23 PM, Syd wrote:
>Since I've had to add a nasal inHG to Kpa conversion to most
> altimeters I've added , I decided maybe its something altimeter.cxx
> should do , so here is a small patch to do that. Could someone check and
> commit please ?
This seems to be an unhappy medi
On 08/28/2008 12:04 PM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
> Here is a little patch that changes the behaviour of the VOR CDI and OFF-flag
> for indicators like the HSI when getting outside the range of the VOR
> station.
> The benefit is:
> - No more jitter for flag and needles
That's not a benefit.
On 08/25/2008 02:45 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> Can you further explain what the bug involves? In my experience, placing
> the aircraft on the glide slope several miles out and flying the glide slope
> all works fine, or am I missing something here?
In my experience, the "glideslope" initializati
On 08/24/2008 01:53 PM, James Turner wrote:
> Doing this, I came across something which seems counter-intuitive to me:
I agree, it's counterintuitive, to say the least.
> default azimuth to offset by is the *reciprocal* runway heading. This
> means to start 10nm 'out' from the threshold, one c
On 08/22/2008 03:47 AM, Tim Moore wrote:
> John Denker wrote:
>> On 08/16/2008 03:32 PM, Tim Moore wrote:
>>>>>> Sport Model was last updated to CVS FlightGear over a year ago. Do you
>>>>>> have any
>>>>>> plans to update it to curr
On 08/16/2008 03:32 PM, Tim Moore wrote:
Sport Model was last updated to CVS FlightGear over a year ago. Do you
have any
plans to update it to current CVS?
On 08/16/2008 06:13 PM, I replied:
>>> I could be persuaded.
>>>
>>> Do you think it would be helpful?
On 08/17/2008 08:28
On 08/20/2008 02:32 PM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> Perhaps I misunderstand the scope and capabilities of git
> And at the end of the day, no matter what source code version control system
> we use, and no matter what useful tools it provides for branching and
> merging, we still need a human in t
On 08/20/2008 04:44 AM, James Turner wrote:
> ... the
> threshold and the 'other end' point (sorry, there must be a better
> piece of terminology than that),
Standard terminology gives you a couple of options:
A) For a given runway, we have
-- the arrival end, and
-- the departure end.
On 08/17/2008 08:13 AM, Timothy Moore wrote:
> the stepping
> code has been moved to an SGStepExpression in
> simgear/structure/SGExpression.hxx, but it should be easy to apply the same
> change there.
Easy indeed. Cut and paste. See patches below.
But before we discuss the code in det
On 08/17/2008 10:01 AM, Ron Jensen wrote:
>> This particular patch was greatly discussed
Yes, it was greatly discussed.
>> and the decision was made
>> not to include it in the main code base.
There was no consensus on that point.
>> The tag was added as
>> the fix for this "problem".
Th
On 08/17/2008 08:51 AM, James Turner wrote:
[snip many lines of agreement]
> I think we're missing an 'audio-panel' simulation, except what
> individual aircraft implement as Nasal scripts
Agreed.
> Yep, thinking about this more, I'm going to plan on moving ATIS to
> FGAirportDynamics, so t
On 08/16/2008 03:32 PM, Tim Moore wrote:
> Sport Model was last updated to CVS FlightGear over a year ago. Do you have
> any
> plans to update it to current CVS?
I could be persuaded.
Do you think it would be helpful?
-
T
> 'FGPositioned' . I'll buy a beer/beer-substitute for
> anyone who comes up with a shorter, more meaningful class name.
How about "FGSite"???
-- It's shorter.
-- Also in this context "site" is a noun, which seems preferable to
adjectives such as "positioned" or "located". [The cor
On 08/15/2008 06:53 PM, James Turner wrote:
> If you could enumerate the issues here, in a new thread, that'd be
> interesting.
Here's a start:
*) There should be false localizer courses abeam the antenna, as
there are in real life. This is implemented in the _Sport Model_
in navradio.cxx
*
On 08/15/2008 01:30 PM, James Turner wrote:
> I encountered the following code, in the middle of
> FGNavList::findNavFromList:
[snip]
> Now, there's two bad things here: (I think)
> - in the DME case (type == 12 or 13), hdg is left 0.0
> - hdg, having been computed, isn't then used: I assum
On 06/13/2008 05:01 AM, Melchior FRANZ wrote in part:
> The second change is in $FG_ROOT/Nasal/io.nas. It replaces the original
> io.open() with a version that checks for illegal write access to
> non-authorized directories. (Reading is allowed everywhere. Use the
> OS' permissions to prevent tha
On 04/25/2008 04:06 PM, Csaba Halász wrote:
> Attached patch adds support for multiple FIXes with the same name.
> Applies to both branches.
> New functionality is in query_and_offset, which now returns the FIX
> closest to the passed in location.
> Updated route manager to take advantage of this.
On 04/27/2008 06:27 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> Well, the important part of my sentense is "generating a meaningful
> error report".
Meaningful to whom?
-- If you mean to the end-user, then I'm totally confused.
Please clarify what you want, and why.
-- If you mean to developers, then
On 04/27/2008 04:11 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> I mean "a process ( fgrun ) acting as a debugger and detecting failure
> of a monitored process ( fgfs ) and then generating a meaningful error
> report"
If you want a process that acts as a debugger, why not use a debugger?
> Of course, if som
On 02/07/2008 07:28 AM, Cleber Santz wrote:
> I have trace same routes using waypoints and find many duplicates
> entries in FIX Data ( like LEPAS, HARDY ) with different coordinates,
> thats is correct ?
1) That is a correct observation, there are duplicate fixes. That
includes named waypoints
On 01/23/2008 05:45 PM, John Wojnaroski wrote:
> Can any of you aero experts out there identify the coefficients that
> account for wing dihedral?
Isn't this what you want?
Roll_moment_due_to_beta
If not, please ask a more specific question.
--
On 01/19/2008 02:22 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote in part:
> Pushing an object instance onto a vector is a bad idea, as a proper
> copy constructor must then be created,
Well ... that is exactly the point I'm trying to discuss.
IMHO if you are going to write 23,000 lines of c++, it
might be worth
On 01/19/2008 07:47 AM, Tim Moore wrote:
> I know for a fact that many of those allocations and assignments use smart
> pointers.
OK.
> How about a more useful list of those that don't?
Good idea. Here you go:
If we exclude files that make *any* mention of 'SGSharedPtr'
or 'ref_ptr' then it
On 01/19/2008 03:40 AM, Tim Moore wrote:
>> Actually, we want to avoid writing explicit deletes as much as possible, as
>> that
>> need is the source of most memory leaks.
Yes indeed.
>> We have two classes for smart, reference-
>> counted pointers, osg::ref_ptr and SGSharedPtr which should be
On 01/18/2008 09:05 AM, till busch wrote:
> i've started to run fg through valgrind. i found this to be a nice option for
> getting an overview over the code in flightgear.
1) This is important, valuable, and overdue.
2) It's going to be a lot of work. That's because
2a) Although it is easy
On 12/29/2007 01:49 PM, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> Microsoft is known to fund and get such schemes
> done.
> ..skillful trolls would inject such forgeries into especially heated
> debates to try maximize the conflict, to try run developers off this
> project, preferably in disgust. I suspect severa
On 12/18/2007 06:04 PM, Shad Young wrote:
> I have been contracted to help develop a
> multi-seat training simulator in which the instructor can trigger
> failures to individual users in a 25 seat to 1 instructor classroom. The
> school in which I am developing this for would prefer to use
On 12/06/2007 04:22 AM, AJ MacLeod wrote:
> One point which keeps cropping up is "size".
We may be able to have this cake and eat it to; see below.
> While I fully agree that it's
> important to keep the base package to a reasonable size so that people aren't
> put off downloading FG, I als
"Vivian Meazza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in part;
>> ... (not that I use it very often) ...
On 12/05/2007 02:59 PM, Syd&Sandy wrote:
> ok that answers my question I thought it was more a user option to
> center joystick , etc...
Maybe I'm missing something, but I thought "5" was a
mouse
On 12/04/2007 11:26 PM, Syd&Sandy wrote:
> Hi all , I've added the elevator, aileron and rudder trim to the
> control-centering function - keypad ( 5 ). Should this be added
> before the release ? Or is there a particular reason that the trims
> aren't reset ?
There is _some_ merit to this idea,
On 12/03/2007 08:32 AM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> An FDM that uses Motorsport physics could be easily created, but the
> interaction between several FDMs is another issue...
Consider the PBY Catalina or other amphibian:
-- When it's in the air, it's an aircraft.
-- When it's on the water, it's a
On 12/02/2007 01:14 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> In a C-172, for instance, ...there is a direct connection between the stick
> and
> rudder.
Yup.
And that's not limited to little Cessnas, either. Additional
examples to illustrate the same point include:
DC-9 pilots say that DC stands for Direct
On 12/02/2007 10:18 AM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
> My question then is reduced to: why doesn't more FDM modellers use these
> features of JSBSim and YASim to create cotrol surfaces that seem to have mass
Probably because in most cases, it would a very unrealistic
way to deal with the reported pr
On 12/02/2007 08:13 AM, Roy Vegard Ovesen wrote:
> When prssing the 5 key on the numeric keypad to reset the controls to zero,
> the control surfaces instantly move to their origin. Similar effects can also
> happen when an autopilot controller is activated, and when a noisy joystick
> is interf
On 11/30/2007 02:36 PM, Durk Talsma wrote:
> I wish one would get as many replies to technical inquiries
> on this list, as what I'm seeing right here
Henry Kissinger said that academic debates are particularly
vicious because "there is so little at stake".
Could we please look at this from t
The Sport Model has an X52.xml file with quite a few enhancements.
Basically everything you need to fly a *complex* single-engine
aircraft IFR is implemented on the X52.
A copy of the documentation is at
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/README.X52
And you can peruse the .xml file itself at
http:
On 11/22/2007 12:59 PM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> What happens if
> the combined moment on the vehicle and the translational force causes only
> one gear to go past its ability to hold traction on the ground?
Well, that's pretty far down on the priority list, but since
you asked:
That happens
On 11/22/2007 09:10 AM, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> At this time, JSBSim zeroes out the wind velocities while at rest on
> the ground, to prevent slippage.
Aha. Thanks for the info.
FWIW that sounds like *two* bugs to me.
1) Maybe we need a better model of static friction and quasi-static
rolling
On 11/22/2007 07:28 AM, LeeE wrote:
> FWIW I also spotted that the coded hard-coded hud has problems around
> headings of 180 deg so that if you are heading slightly to one side of
> 180 deg and there's enough of a cross-wind to swing the direction
> indicator to the other side of 180 deg it di
On 11/22/2007 04:58 AM, LeeE wrote:
> I've slowly been fixing the aircraft I've done that have been broken by
> updates in the FG code and I've noticed that we no longer seem to have
> access to the aircraft yaw in the property tree.
>
> When I first set up the rear-wheel steering for the B-52F
On 11/12/2007 05:52 AM, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> That's a really interesting idea, and I like your proposed language.
:-)
> 1) I'm pretty sure that implementing this will require quite a change
> to the input code, as we'll need a proper input parser rather than
> the simple keyboard mapping we
On 11/11/2007 09:36 PM, David Megginson wrote:
> This is a good discussion that we've started.
> I think that we need to take a few steps:
Agreed! I've thought for ages that a top-to-bottom reorg
would be helpful.
The starting point for me was the realization that there
are far more aircraft f
On 10/19/2007 09:27 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
>> ... if you start from an
>> airport, or if you initialize at a reasonable altitude, then what happens?
>> I don't think the engine model should allow one to climb to 100,000'. The
>> c-172 engine model can't power the aircraft very high.
> I only get
On 10/15/2007 03:25 PM, Hans Fugal wrote:
> I would like to see AWOS/ASOS in the next release, if nobody objects.
Yes, that would be a Good Thing.
> A couple of approaches have been suggested, and one stopgap (replace
> the ATIS data file with one that includes AWOS/ASOS like the one I
> generate
On 10/13/2007 11:14 AM, Curtis Olson wrote:
> One thing to be a little careful about when coding is that it's easy to be
> tempted to check for the same error condition in multiple places or at
> multiple levels of the function call stack. That's not always optimal and
> can lead to inconsistenci
On Monday 08 October 2007 02:17, dave perry wrote:
> The SenecaII wing rock with light turbulence appears to result from a
> very exaggerated adverse aileron yaw.
> So I did the same experiment with
> the c172p and pa28-140
I agree that they both exhibit unrealistically bad handing
characteris
On 09/04/2007 09:47 AM, Andy Ross wrote:
> the patch
I assume we are still talking about:
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1584727&group_id=382&atid=100382
> strchr()
> returns a pointer into the *same* memory it got. The constness needs
> to be synchroni
On 09/03/2007 10:49 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> A "const" char* is exactly the same thing as a regular pointer at
> the level of CPU instructions.
H.
> Writing to it does exactly the
> same thing as writing to a non-const pointer.
1) I assume "writing to it" means writing to the chars (not wr
On 09/01/2007 03:34 PM, Tim Moore wrote:
> John,
> Is this information about your git repositories still current?
Probably. I haven't tested it in a while. I've been away
from my simulator ... way too busy with other stuff, including
flying real airplanes.
> John Den
y the CEO - it could
> easily be delegated.
>
> Similarly, John Denker recently commented on the huge proportion of
> checkins made by Melchior Franz. Melchior does a quite incredible job
> ensure that the data tree in particular is kept in good order, and
> committing huge numbers of co
On 07/11/2007 11:48 AM, Robert Black wrote:
> It looks like there has been good progress in the area of ATC recently with
> the ATC Radar and work with voice. Right away there will be use for ATC text
> messages and even after voice for when you are unable to use it and need to
> fall back or
On 07/11/2007 07:26 AM, gh.robin wrote:
> Could it be possible , to limit the MP animation only to surface
> position , the model creators will take care of i.
> When making the animations, he could decide if one specification is valuable
> for the pilot only or valuable for both the pilot and
On 07/10/2007 01:40 PM, Csaba Halász wrote:
> Maybe try the sed hack with a shorter prefix, such as replacing
> _ZNSt6vector with _ZNSt6vectorX. Note that it is a pretty brutal thing
> to do for the whole binary, and might break it in a million ways.
1) It's more likely to work if the replacement
On 07/10/2007 03:24 PM, Maik Justus wrote:
> John Denker schrieb am 10.07.2007 21:05:
>> Committed to the _Sport Model_.
>>
>
> ???
> as as I read the cvslogs, it was already committed to cvs.
The two commits happened within a few minutes of each other.
Such things
On 07/10/2007 02:21 PM, Hans Fugal wrote:
> Will someone please apply this patch, or provide feedback? Thanks!
Feedback: Looks sensible. Works fine chez moi (Debian etch, OSG).
Committed to the _Sport Model_.
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/README.sport.model
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/git-over
On 07/08/2007 07:48 AM, Torsten Dreyer wrote:
>> The FG HSI instrument now has a double-shafted ADF(RMI) needle,
>> as shown here:
>>http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/RMI.jpg
>> which is more nearly like a real-world HSI/ADF(RMI).
>
> interesting.
:-)
> Is this modeled after
On 07/07/2007 05:47 PM, Tim Moore wrote:
> I think it's great that you're using git
It's a nifty thing.
> and and hope that we can
> reconcile pigeon's split SimGear / FlightGear git repo, which is a bit
> of a pain but updated automatically from CVS, with your more unified
> setup. In the
Hi --
This pertains to the HSI instrument as used in the c182, c182rg,
and many other GA aircraft models.
The FG HSI instrument now has a double-shafted ADF(RMI) needle,
as shown here:
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/RMI.jpg
which is more nearly like a real-world HSI/ADF(RMI).
On 07/07/2007 05:16 AM, Gordan Sikic wrote:
> Dear John,
>
> I didn't have any intention to start any quarrellings with you. Being
> open minded, I've just asked you to share your literature with us, and I
> don't understand why you feel so pissed off.
Why do you think I am "pissed" at you? AF
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 t
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 y
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
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 rep
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
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 pro
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 slowe
On 07/06/2007 12:39 AM, Innis Cunningham wrote:
> A quick check of my system would indicate that the
> file fglrx_dri.so or anything starting with fglrx is not
> present on my system.
That's the end of that story.
Time for a new story.
Suggestion: Recompile all of FG with debugging symbols
t
On 07/05/2007 10:04 PM, Innis Cunningham wrote:
> would just like to know how I fix it.
Basic idea: The problem is in the fglrx_dri.so module
that is part of the X11 system. (It is not part of
FlightGear.) I don't know the details, but I get the
impression it makes wild memory references, so th
On 07/05/2007 09:49 PM, Innis Cunningham wrote:
> And the fix is.???
http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg11124.html
That's a little bit terse; if you need more details, please
ask again.
-
On 07/05/2007 12:59 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
References can be lvalues, so it's possible to write functions whose
returned valued can be assigned.
True.
The examples are usually pretty
academic, but consider a sparse 2D array with a method like
int& element(int x, int y);
You can use this
A few minutes ago, I explained how in environment.cxx,
the model of the atmosphere could be extended up above
100,000 feet.
Everything I said was true, but it was not the whole
story.
As I have pointed out previously, the model of the
atmosphere in environment.cxx is bogus. By that I
mean it con
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 nothing which could give the right
answer.
Do we have
On 07/05/2007 05:26 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> But, all that being said: yes, you found a bug. The
> spans-are-too-wide problem* is caused by a sign bug when calculating
> the "extra" amount to distribute between spanned cells. Fixed in CVS.
Thank you for fixing the bug.
-
On 07/05/2007 04:48 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> John Denker wrote:
>> Yes, I tried it. It looks terrible.
>>
>> It still appears to be miscalculating by a factor of 3 the required column
>> width.
>
> A factor of 3? Dunno, it looks fine to me, and I can verify
On 07/05/2007 03:40 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> Putting one word in each column only happens looks better because of
> the details of your layout and the length of your strings.
Not true.
> Let the
> layout manager pick the size, that's what it's there for. Just remove
> the width and height lines
On 07/05/2007 03:40 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> Here's the problem. You're giving your dialog a fixed size, then
> asking it to display something that doesn't quite fit.
On my syste, with the default style, it should fit with room left
over. The working version makes this particularly clear.
Why
On 07/05/2007 02:15 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> Can you provide a case where it doesn't?
Compare:
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/weather.xmlworks
http://www.av8n.com/fly/fgfs/weather.xmlbroken
The difference between them is simple, and is attached below.
The working file contains a working colsp
On 07/05/2007 12:13 PM, Andy Ross wrote:
> Use the "rowspan" and "colspan" properties. Check Docs/README.layout
> for details.
Yes, the feature is documented, and there is some code to
implement it (in GUI/layout.cxx) ... but it doesn't work
reliably. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
301 - 400 of 576 matches
Mail list logo
