[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17285] flag ignore when paradrop

URL: Summary: flag ignore when paradrop Project: Freeciv Submitted by: None Submitted on: Thu 09 Dec 2010 08:22:14 PM UTC Category: general Severity: 2 - Minor

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17284] Memory leak in process_attacker_want with experimental ruleset

URL: Summary: Memory leak in process_attacker_want with experimental ruleset Project: Freeciv Submitted by: None Submitted on: Thu 09 Dec 2010 06:54:08 PM UTC Category: ai Seve

Re: [Freeciv-Dev] Freeciv.net now in the Google Chrome Web Store

On Wed, 8 Dec 2010, Daniel Markstedt wrote: Congrats on this. The Web Store seems to be a quite high-profile endeavor on behalf of Google, so it will probably give you some good exposure. BTW, do you have plans to make this more than 'just' a simple link to the website? What kind of additional b

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17281] Segmentation fault in get_total_defense_power

Update of bug #17281 (project freeciv): Status:None => Confirmed ___ Follow-up Comment #1: I can confirm it; it seems to be that defender is NULL in a combat > #0 0x004d0a08 in

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17282] Metaserver says players are playing when they are not

URL: Summary: Metaserver says players are playing when they are not Project: Freeciv Submitted by: None Submitted on: Thu Dec 9 14:01:44 2010 Category: general Severity: 3 - N

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17281] Segmentation fault in get_total_defense_power

URL: Summary: Segmentation fault in get_total_defense_power Project: Freeciv Submitted by: doctorjlowe Submitted on: Thu 09 Dec 2010 01:59:59 PM GMT Category: None Severity: 3

Re: [Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15805] fix city map (variable city radii, xaw client)

On 8 December 2010 23:39, David Lowe wrote: > > 0: "data/default/techs.ruleset": ruleset datafile appears incompatible: > 0:   datafile options: +Freeciv-2.3-ruleset > 0:   supported options: +1.9 This error message says that ruleset file is freeciv-2.3 compatible and your binary is not, not the

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15805] fix city map (variable city radii, xaw client)

Follow-up Comment #12, bug #15805 (project freeciv): > unable to load save games in xaw client. I did test it - I can start a new game but after I did load a savegame I could not connect to it. Only after I did use a username which was defined in the game it did work. For the example game (file

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17267] asserts in civmanual (module nation)

Update of bug #17267 (project freeciv): Release: 2.3.0 => 2.2.99 Planned Release: 2.3.0,2.3.1 => 2.3.0,2.4.0 Summary: civmanual does not give error messages => asserts in civmanual (module nation

Re: [Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15805] fix city map (variable city radii, xaw client)

If you start freeciv from the build directory, the data directory from this build is used. Try #> ./civ or/and #> ./ser I do it all the time while another freeciv version is installed as rpm. Am Donnerstag, 9. Dezember 2010, 10:28:44 schrieb David Lowe: > On 8 Dec, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Matthias

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17267] civmanual does not give error messages

Update of bug #17267 (project freeciv): Release: => 2.3.0 ___ Follow-up Comment #3: But there are still the errors for 2.3.0 ... _

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17267] civmanual does not give error messages

Follow-up Comment #2, bug #17267 (project freeciv): My apologies, you are indeed correct. I must have still had an old version. I rebuilt 2.2.4 and saw the same as you see for 2.2.3. ___ Reply to this item at:

Re: [Freeciv-Dev] [bug #15805] fix city map (variable city radii, xaw client)

On 8 Dec, 2010, at 3:04 PM, Matthias Pfafferodt wrote: > @Dave >> 0: "data/default/techs.ruleset": ruleset datafile appears >> incompatible: >> 0: datafile options: +Freeciv-2.3-ruleset >> 0: supported options: +1.9 > > You have old ruleset data somethere in the path. Freeciv 2.3.0 has updated

[Freeciv-Dev] [bug #17264] Percentage chance for veteran spies to beat green diplomats is too high

Update of bug #17264 (project freeciv): Status: Ready For Test => In Progress ___ Follow-up Comment #5: > Since MAX_VET_LEVELS is hardcoded at 10 what is the point of > doing this calculation 20/MAX