Corax

$ du --max-depth=0 -h backups/screenshot.archive/ 35G backups/screenshot.archive/

Also, saying it creates problems for CKAN users is neither fair nor correct. It creates problems for people who don't bother to learn and understand the tools they are using, whatever the tool. Computing or otherwise. But those are the same people that will come complaining when whatever tool they are using is telling them an old version is more compatible and breaks their game, because while the latest version would technically be compatible but isn't marked as such yet, a much older version had been marked as compatible with any version, and now insists on taking precedence.

I get that. I have thrown in the towel long ago, and I truly appreciate those who manage to keep up despite all that, all the time. I'm not saying it's wrong to assume a mod is going to stay compatible for a reasonable amount of time, although KSP has had breaking changes with only patch level updates too. However, the interval between KSP minor version updates is usually long enough that once every half year or so would be enough, even if nothing needs to be done besides bumping the .version file. On the other hand, once an incompatible old version continues to say "yahoo, but I *am* compatible with every KSP version under the sun, believe me" even though it clearly isn't, I imagine it'll be much harder to get that back under control. Just my humble opinion.

Yeah right, I know? They better work their asses off for the money we pay them, and pronto! Oh wait...

A big thanks to the creators and maintainers of this mod, but... As convenient as it may seem at first, could you please not mark mods containing plugins as compatible with all versions of KSP for the foreseeable future? Even parts-only mods or simple MM patches regularly get thrown off by later KSP releases. I mean if you must, mark it as compatible with 1.9.99999bar, but who is going to guarantee that KSP won't change its API some time between 1.10.0…1.99.99? And what is going to happen in 1.99.100 that will make it incompatible with 1.99.99? It's not even trivial for humans to check what version of a mod is compatible with their KSP install... The point in having metadata is to allow automated tools to make decisions, and they don't have the mental flexibility. I understand it's a hassle to keep it updated, but if you don't provide correct and meaningful metadata, it's probably better not to provide any at all and require manual installation only. My apologies if this is a bit of a rant, but bad versioning gets me worked up almost as bad as ?dl=0 "downloads" from dropbox ;)

I don't think it is, but I'd love to be proven wrong. Failing the elegant MM approach, as a hackjob you could try moving _your_ settings.cfg out of the way so KSP generates a new default one, then 'diff' those two, and include a call to 'patch' in your launcher script... $ diff -Naur KSP/settings.cfg backuplocation/settings.backup > backuplocation/mysettings.patch $ patch --dry-run KSP/settings.cfg backuplocation/mysettings.patch Take the above snippet with a grain of salt; I haven't experimented with either approach, mostly because I was too lazy and usually just copied my old settings to a new install, but unless the MM route turns out to be feasible, I think I'm going to try that approach for the upcoming update cycle...

As I said, I haven't looked into the files you released, just at the code snippet. It all depends on how your actual PART definition looks like before the patch; if it doesn't have an INTERNAL to begin with, then all is well. Which it probably is, I just instinctively assumed you were reusing another part, like copying Squad's, and modifying that, which would already come with an INTERNAL. Only in that case would you either need to modify the existing internal, ie. {… @INTERNAL{ and @%+ stuff here} …}, or remove and add a new internal, ie. {-INTERNAL{} INTERNAL{…new stuff here…} }. What you're doing, at least what it looked like to me, is just the second half of the second case, ie. adding an(other) INTERNAL{}. If you're in fact providing a part without an INTERNAL in the first place, then all should be fine, and I apologize for wasting your time with a false alarm.

Just a random thought, and only half joking... what is it with the radiation warning signs? Ignoring the fact that anyone coming even close would bloody well know that there is a nuclear device, down to its precise location: As long as the engine is cold, it shouldn't matter much, and once it is hot and you're close enough to make it out (provided you're "lucky" enough to actually approach from the side where you *can* see it), it isn't going to make a difference any more, is it? ;) Love the stuff you're doing. No, seriously.

That's how bowdlerization works. The forum doesn't like certain letter combinations, no matter the context, and it doesn't tell you when it "fixes" your transgressions. You may count yourself lucky that this doesn't affect your social rating. Yet. /s

FYI, the "download from CKAN" is just a pointer to the file it needs, in this case it is referencing one on Github. The CKAN is basically just a big database of where to find things to download and how to install them, it does not host any of the actual files.

Never heard of that, sounds interesting to say the least, I'll have to look it up.

Without looking at any of the files, and unless I misunderstood what this mod does, I'm fairly certain you'd need to remove the provided IVA first in both instances @PART[thePart]:NEEDS[whatItNeeds]{ -INTERNAL{} INTERNAL{… otherwise you end up with two IVAs, and I don't think KSP acts favourably in that case...

I don't know Ace Combat, or how it models its physics and flight controls, so it may well behave very differently from what you experience in KSP. How the aircraft reacts to rudder will depend on its design. Basically, the farther away the rudder is offset from the longitudinal axis (the higher up it is), the more roll it will induce in addition to yaw, to the point where it acts more like an aileron if it is far enough. Which is actually one way to think of the rudder, as a single, asymmetric aileron. When your aircraft rolls because you applied rudder, what I think happens when you release the rudder is one wing will create more lift, and depending on the design, roll the plane back towards the starting point. You can either apply opposite roll at the same time you apply rudder to lessen the reaction, or you can apply roll afterwards to stop the plane from rolling back on its own. You'll probably also need to apply some pitch at the same time if you want to keep the nose pointing in the same direction. This also ties into the sideslip technique mentioned above by QF9E to reduce your airspeed. All of this is significantly more difficult if you're flying with keyboard controls, but it is definitely something one can learn. Use short, small taps on the keys, observe how the aircraft reacts, and repeat until you get a feeling for it. Of course, you need to turn off SAS (you really shouldn't have it on to begin with) or it will simply mask your inputs with its attempts to counteract.

...and even more so when you're in a game that gives you nearly none of the visual clues like buildings and trees like you'd have in real life. Originally as postscriptum to my previous post: I'm not too familiar with miles per hour, but I think a good quick approximation there should be multiplying by 2.5 (add a zero to the end, and divide by four), and for extra precision, again subtracting ten percent. And for knots: times two, less five percent. For km/h, the conversion is correct; knots and mph are just my estimates, without sources–don't use them where your life depends on it, like for real aviation, or in maths exams. For a quick reality check, and definitely for use in a game, they should be good enough.

One thing I see over and over again is new players calling something difficult or impossible, and then mentioning they're just trying to land going no more than 200... or their rover flips and crashes at only 100... you really need to burn that into your brain to automatically and instinctively convert those m/s into the system you're familiar with, be it kph or km/h, or whatever else that may be. For me, it's km/h, and there it's as simple as taking any speeds KSP throws at me and multiplying them by four. Usually it's close enough if you even leave off the last one or two digits and only consider the tens and hundreds. That doesn't take more than a moment. If you really need to know the exact value, you can simply take ten percent off that and you're spot on, but that precision is rarely needed, and even then, it's a simple calculation anyway.

Thanks! The obvious workaround of moving or symlinking the directory from where it is installed to where OhScrap expects it to be seems to work for me. Proceed with caution, YMMV, etc. pp.

Only so they have something they then need to postpone, because of budgets, politics, subcontractors, the weather... ;)

In an alternate timeline, where a young Egon Musk founded WeltraumX as a spin-off from MBB in 1982...

Actually I think I would, desire that is. Maybe it's just the way I'm used to how window focusing works with my window manager (Focus follows mouse, but not required to click, I think I've also seen it called "lazy focus" in other places). IMO it speeds up the workflow considerably, which is especially helpful in situations like KSP, where you might need to quickly give input focus to your main controls, and the additional click may take just that fraction of a second too long.

If you look at the first image in the OP, there's that crane icon on the toolbar that opens the upper one of the two visible windows. On that window, there are two buttons on the bottom row: "Quick Apply" and "New Parts". The first one tries to replace all the new, unused parts you have on your vessel with eligible parts from your inventory, while the other one basically does the opposite.

Welcome back, hope you had a pleasant vacation. I like that idea; currently, KerbalConstructionTime awards (or at least can be configured to) Science for constructing vessels, which I always considered a bit odd, although I have to admit, not entirely unwelcome ;) Awarding Science for testing makes more sense IMO; I'd definitely prefer that over construction. Don't know about Rep though. I can see it on either side of the coin.

As I said, it's absolutely not your fault–it's just the way I'm wired, and apparently, I'm part of a minority, for whatever cultural or other reasons. I don't have a problem with that as long as there is a way to mute the background music. Just to be clear, I usually do listen to the music of a new game for a while because it does undeniably convey atmosphere, but once I start noticing the repeats, it goes from being atmospheric to annoying, and I have to shut it off. It's just a general limitation basically any game is bound to encounter. No matter how many hours of music, or how many individual tracks there are, unless the game's overall play time is limited in some way, or the budget virtually unlimited–both being fairly unrealistic–there will always be the need to repeat parts of the music. You proudly announce "over two hours of music", which is no mean feat by any means, but considering the fact that many people have played KSP for literally thousands of hours, even that is just a blip. Apparently it is not a problem for most people to listen to the same music over and over again; I can only guess is they just tune out, and only notice when it's not there anymore, if they even notice at all. In fact, it seems to almost be a problem for many if there isn't a constant soundscape, something I've never really understood. Not only in games, but in general. Enough of my rambling, keep on composing! And most of all, thanks for generously providing the fruits of your labour.

@linuxgurugamer OP said they wanted to look into it and probably reupload. Notice that at the time of my initial post, I had the same md5sum as that of @ssd21345, and I had just downloaded and checked it right before I posted. I don't intend to actually use the soundtrack, so I won't dive any deeper into this. That is not to disparage @-ctn- or any other composer, I just find repeated background music grating at my nerves, no matter how well it is composed and performed. On the other hand, when I want to listen to music, I want to give it the attention it deserves. With that out of the way, and coming from a non-musician, I do like the music for what it is.

Just my two cents, but considering other mods store entire hangars full of .craft data, in addition to KSP's own, in persistent.sfs, I wouldn't worry *too* much about including a few Kerbals' names.

error: invalid compressed data to inflate file #6: bad zipfile offset (local header sig): 9942212 Gentoo GNU/Linux 5.6.7, xarchiver 0.5.4.14 EDIT: Re-posting the rest of it... sorry for not putting it into spoiler tags, Invision seems hungry today. $ md5sum 20200521-MoviesCollin-Original_Score_Project-1-spacedock.2433.zip 38fb14b6d633346ac88039f0b2955345 20200521-MoviesCollin-Original_Score_Project-1-spacedock.2433.zip $ unzip -t 20200521-MoviesCollin-Original_Score_Project-1-spacedock.2433.zip Archive: 20200521-MoviesCollin-Original_Score_Project-1-spacedock.2433.zip testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/1 Moho/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/2 Eve/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/2 Eve/Eve 1.ogg error: invalid compressed data to inflate file #6: bad zipfile offset (local header sig): 9942212 testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/2 Eve/Eve Space.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/Minmus/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/Minmus/Minmus 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/Minmus/Minmus 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/Mun/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/3 Kerbin/Mun/Mun.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/4 Duna/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/4 Duna/Duna 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/4 Duna/Duna 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/4 Duna/Duna 3.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/4 Duna/Duna Space.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/5 Dres/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Jool 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Jool 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Jool 3.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Jool Moons 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Jool Moons 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Laythe/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Laythe/Laythe 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/6 Jool/Laythe/Laythe 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/7 Eeloo/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/7 Eeloo/Eeloo 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Bodies/7 Eeloo/Eeloo 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/Construction 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/Construction 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/Construction 3.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/Construction 4.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Construction/Construction 5.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Main Theme.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Menu Ambience.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Main/Tracking Station.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/Space 1.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/Space 2.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/Space 3.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/Space 4.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Music/Space/Space 5.ogg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/OST graphic.png OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Playlists/ OK testing: KSPOST_v1/Playlists/playlists.cfg OK testing: KSPOST_v1/README.txt OK At least one error was detected in 20200521-MoviesCollin-Original_Score_Project-1-spacedock.2433.zip. $ unzip -v UnZip 6.00 of 20 April 2009, by Info-ZIP. Maintained by C. Spieler. Send bug reports using http://www.info-zip.org/zip-bug.html; see README for details. Latest sources and executables are at ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/ ; see ftp://ftp.info-zip.org/pub/infozip/UnZip.html for other sites. Compiled with gcc 9.2.0 for Unix (Linux ELF).