Update of patch #1831 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of patch #1840 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of patch #1827 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Done
Assigned to:None = cazfi
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Follow-up Comment #3, patch #1831 (project freeciv):
It produces a warning (when trying to compile w/ debugging support):
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/heilkitty/soft/freeciv/trunk/server'
CC unithand.lo
cc1: warnings being treated as errors
unithand.c: In function
Follow-up Comment #4, patch #1831 (project freeciv):
unithand.c:1348: error: implicit declaration of function
'can_unit_attack_all_at_tile'
That's weird since I cannot reproduce this, nor does the patch add call to
can_unit_attack_all_at_tile or remove include directivies.
Are you sure your
Follow-up Comment #5, patch #1831 (project freeciv):
Seems so, sorry for the false alarm.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/patch/?1831
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
Update of bug #16421 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Planned Release: = 2.1.12, 2.2.3, 2.3.0
Follow-up Comment #2, patch #1838 (project freeciv):
Updated patch against current svn.
(file #9814)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File name: trunk_multiplayer_rewonder2.diff Size:47 KB
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16423
Summary: 1: Entry value not recognized: error
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: pepeto
Submitted on: samedi 14.08.2010 à 09:40
Category: rulesets
Severity: 2 - Minor
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #16423 (project freeciv):
With the following patch I intend to commit:
1: Entry value not recognized:
file data/nation/hasinay.ruleset, line 49, pos 11
looking at: ', '
included from file data/default/nations.ruleset, line 151
(file #9815)
Update of bug #16423 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
___
Follow-up Comment #2:
There was an extra
Update of bug #16411 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Planned Release: = 2.1.12, 2.2.3, 2.3.0
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #16411 (project freeciv):
Attached compilable fix for S2_1.
(file #9820)
___
Additional Item Attachment:
File name: S2_1_gw_nw_tile_only_once2.diff Size:1 KB
Update of bug #16410 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Planned Release: = 2.2.3, 2.3.0
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #16410 (project freeciv):
Ouch!
I should have seen that :(
So, if one needs to modify the nations in a custom ruleset, also the
../data/nation folder should be copied to form the basis of the modification.
Thus, my example ruleset would consist of
../data/myDeafult
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16426
Summary: Changing terrain to ocean should not clean
pollution unconditionally
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: handuman
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 11:15
Category: None
Update of bug #15945 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
___
Follow-up Comment #3:
Fix attached:
* Can investigate twice.
* Simplified the usage of
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16427
Summary: city::units_supported allocated twice
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: pepeto
Submitted on: samedi 14.08.2010 à 11:30
Category: client
Severity: 2 - Minor
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #16426 (project freeciv):
But in a default ruleset the flag may be absent by choise
Do you mean in a custom ruleset?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16426
Update of bug #16426 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Confirmed
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16426
___
Message posté
Update of bug #16426 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Status: Confirmed = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Planned Release:
Update of bug #16399 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Wont Fix
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of bug #16401 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #16387 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Need Info
___
Follow-up Comment #5:
Could someone confirm or infirm this is a bug? It appears to me to be a
feature of the shuffled
Update of bug #16384 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Wont Fix
Assigned to:None = pepeto
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Update of bug #16012 (project freeciv):
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = pepeto
___
Reply to this item at:
Update of bug #16000 (project freeciv):
Category:None = general
Priority: 5 - Normal = 1 - Later
___
Reply to this item at:
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #16426 (project freeciv):
Do you mean in a custom ruleset?
Yes I do, sorry for the confusion.
I have to disagree with the attached fix, though. The NoPollution flag only
affects pollution, not nuclear fallout. Is it possibly hardcoded that fallout
never hits oceanic
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #16341 (project freeciv):
Nations page
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16341
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
Update of bug #16426 (project freeciv):
Status: Ready For Test = Need Info
___
Follow-up Comment #4:
Seems you need to discuss first 3 points:
1. Does nuclear fallout are considered as pollution
On 13 Aug, 2010, at 12:30 AM, Ann wrote:
Follow-up Comment #9, patch #1698 (project freeciv):
The term early modern does have a definition, in the sense that it is used
to refer to the years named in European history. So in that sense it is not
open to interpretation: it begins with a
Update of bug #16418 (project freeciv):
Severity: 3 - Normal = 4 - Important
Status:None = Ready For Test
Assigned to:None = jtn
Planned Release:
Follow-up Comment #11, bug #16100 (project freeciv):
When I commit the fix for bug #16418 I'll close this as duplicate, unless
there are objections -- the cause fits the symptoms. (I'll sort out the
function name separately.)
___
Reply to
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16428
Summary: AI never builds bases
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 17:39
Category: ai
Severity: 3 - Normal
Priority: 1 -
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16429
Summary: Failed sanitycheck.c: Engineers has activity
Railroad, but it can't continue at Forest
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 17:42
Category: None
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16430
Summary: [debug] Warn if same file specified twice in
--debug
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 18:02
Category: None
Severity: 2 - Minor
Could we maybe start a patch, or discussion board discussion of this?
That would allow others who haven't previously expressed an interest
to join in.
Ann
David
On the other hand, more divisions are needed, as the number of nations grows.
?!? It is not obvious to me more of one
On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Ann Barcomb a...@domaintje.com wrote:
Could we maybe start a patch, or discussion board discussion of this?
That would allow others who haven't previously expressed an interest
to join in.
Ann
David
On the other hand, more divisions are needed, as the
On 14.08.2010 23:24, Daniel Markstedt wrote:
One idea that I've had for some time is to redesign the UI so that you
can filter nations based on several criteria at once, with a simple
example being African AND Modern. Perhaps by making each group a
checkbox rather than a tab.
Maybe,
URL:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16431
Summary: --Ppm colours players 32 randomly
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 18:50
Category: None
Severity: 2 - Minor
Follow-up Comment #6, bug #16387 (project freeciv):
It doesn't seem like a bug to me.
With Freeciv in its default concurrent phasemode, you can't rely on a
particular order of things happening on the next turn, as any player can
notionally do anything at any time. However, as I understand it,
URL:
http://gna.org/patch/?1854
Summary: Improve EFT_DEFEND_BONUS/F_IGWALL/F_BADWALLATTACKER
docs in README.effects/comments
Project: Freeciv
Submitted by: jtn
Submitted on: Saturday 08/14/10 at 22:11
Category: docs
Update of bug #16080 (project freeciv):
Open/Closed:Open = Closed
Operating System: Microsoft Windows = None
___
Follow-up Comment #11:
This ticket
Follow-up Comment #10, bug #15347 (project freeciv):
This bug is languishing, and I haven't had time to look at the latest crash.
I've been thinking for a while that it seems a shame to reinvent the wheel
for this. It looks like we already incorporate parts of the SDL_gfx library
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #16108 (project freeciv):
FWIW, 10065 is WSAEHOSTUNREACH, no route to host.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?16108
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #15999 (project freeciv):
10053 is WSAECONNABORTED Software caused connection abort. MS' description
is An established connection was aborted by the software in your host
computer, possibly due to a data transmission time-out or protocol error.
IME it can mean anything
Follow-up Comment #1, bug #15887 (project freeciv):
The blue arrow was finally made functional by patch #1721.
Some changes have been made to how units are displayed in the sidebar (e.g.,
patch #1722), although there are outstanding issues (see discussion in patch
#1685). I'm not sure all of
Follow-up Comment #2, bug #15683 (project freeciv):
Might this have been bug #16375?
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?15683
___
Message sent via/by Gna!
http://gna.org/
Follow-up Comment #3, bug #15683 (project freeciv):
Too hasty... on second thoughts, I can't see how it can have been precisely
that.
___
Reply to this item at:
http://gna.org/bugs/?15683
Follow-up Comment #5, bug #16308 (project freeciv):
Thank you George. Then I guess the best option for now is to use the Great
Wall effect of default ruleset.
I have noticed another possible bug similar to this one. When I use the
requeriment Special, River, Adjacent in my rulesets, it seems to
Follow-up Comment #7, bug #15559 (project freeciv):
I have a similar bug using OpenBSD. I am running an old snapshot of OpenBSD
4.5-current.
My server (S2_2 r17748) accepted connections from localhost and from
127.0.0.1, but not from ::1. I found that my server had no IPv6 support,
because
On 13 Aug, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Lavrentij P Berija wrote:
I've made quick'n'dirty patch (which seems to work though) which makes stack
death rule applied only for reachable units. Maybe it's worth raising a
thread on forum to decide if this behaviour would be appropriate for players?
It
On 15.08.2010 10:13, David Lowe wrote:
On 13 Aug, 2010, at 5:51 AM, Lavrentij P Berija wrote:
I've made quick'n'dirty patch (which seems to work though) which makes stack
death rule applied only for reachable units. Maybe it's worth raising a
thread on forum to decide if this behaviour
53 matches
Mail list logo
