DStaal

Works fine for me.

Ok, where is your Kerbal install? You're in your home/user directory, and I’m pretty sure it's not there, which is why this isn't working. `cd` is 'change directory' - you need to enter either the full or relative path to your Kerbal install after it. You're entering the relative path 'Kerbal Space Program', meaning 'a directory named "Kerbal Space Program" in my current directory', but it's not there. If you can find it, that will help. Otherwise if you have a Windows program that can do multi-file find and replace, that's all you're actually trying to do.

You sure you're first two commands didn't do anything? Unix philosophy is generally to return nothing on success - it makes it easier to chain things together. (Though the last slash on the first command may be an issue.) The third command does have issues. What you probably meant was this: cd Kerbal\ Space\ Program/Gamedata/UmbraSpaceIndustries/; find ./ -type f -iname *.cfg -exec sed -i -e 's/ModuleResourceHarvester_USI/USI_Harvester/g' {} \; But that's basically nearly the same as doing the first two commands. (The '\ ' is escaping a space, so that it doesn't separate the words. The '/' indicates a directory.)

Or go to the full version of AVC and use the new version override feature... (Than you'll still get notified of updates.)

Which was why I was suggesting a low-power transmitter for the adaptor, with a fuel cell - then you can transmit and recharge your batteries, but you need to think about how much to use it, as you'll end up up fuel-limited for your mission. It's also historically appropriate, I think: the service module has 'in-orbit necessary' equipment, but you could abort or land without it.

I wouldn't mind that. Though at the moment I don't really see the need for more EC - you can't transmit science from the ship, and there's not really any other drains, so the only real EC usage is for reaction wheels, which just don't take that much. (Unless you're running an LS mod which uses EC.) Sure you could put an antenna in the cargo bay - but you can put a small battery in the bay as well. My build has around 400m/s dv from the engines - though I use over 100m/s of that for a circularization burn to enter orbit, so I haven't actually tried to rendezvous and dock with it yet. (Especially since at this point most of my space stations I’m transferring Kerbals to are in *high* orbit - this would be plenty to rendezvous in low orbit, but it's pushing it to high orbit.)

This works surprisingly well - four Kerbals to orbit, with some fuel to maneuver and dock: That's a full-sized docking port. Engines in use: I'm using some monoprop engines from Internal RCS. My one thought is that the adaptor to 1.85m is pretty much dead weight. A thought would be to make it a small service module: a monoprop fuel cell, an antenna, and a small monoprop fuel tank. (Maybe 50 units or so.)

The post above yours says it doesn't need to.

I don't think there's anything technically wrong with it - except that the version if KAS it needs isn't supported under 1.7. (You need KAS for the power connectors, and the method this uses was depreciated.)

Nginx is really more of proxy server that happens to be able to serve some webpages. I've used both it and HAProxy; both have worked well and been easy to set up. I haven't worked with TrafficServer, I'd be interested in your thoughts.

I suspect it's that you're running other mods that are modifying the stock part by name, and don't know about your part. You might try your patch with a ':FINAL' statement as the order statement, and see if applying it after other patches helps. You can also try looking in Module Manager's config cache it writes out, and comparing the two parts.

One of the other attempts at the dyna-soar in KSP actually implemented one of these, IIRC. It does have the disadvantage that if you're playing realistically you can't transfer a Kerbal through it - it just holds the ships together while you EVA between them.

How about taking the 1.85 adapter, cutting it short, then adding a fairing to where it was? That is, have a node on the bottom, and then another node at the original bottom, which if used gives a fairing between. Then you put the docking port on the bottom, and stack from the fairing (below the docking port) to the launcher. Orbital engine location could be a problem, but the plane is fairly small so a couple of Twitch or Spider engines (or relying on RCS) should cover that for most cases.

The docs might actually scare you off, since there's lots of edge-cases they cover... It's mostly very simple. You put those lines in a text file with the name ending in .cfg anywhere under your GameData folder. Typically if you're doing it for yourself, it's best to create a folder of your own to put them in under GameData. Here's docs, if you want them: https://github.com/sarbian/ModuleManager/wiki/Module-Manager-Handbook

Actually... Disney didn't push this time when X+Y equaled Z. Everyone was expecting them to, but it didn't happen. (Likely because everyone was expecting them to, and ready for a fight.) Copyright actually expired on works this January. (Though Mickey Mouse is still covered for a couple of years.) News coverage: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2019/01/a-whole-years-worth-of-works-just-fell-into-the-public-domain/

Nginx shines (and is quite easy to set up) as a reverse proxy. We use it all the time in my day job. (Managing Linux/Unix servers.)

I believe you're looking for this mod:

To me, on makes more sense: It makes it easier to place when you do want it, and doesn't interfere with surface attachment when you don't.

As an idea for a solution, based on how KIS adds inventory to a Kerbal: @PART[kerbalEVA*] { MODULE { name = KJRExcluded } } After all, Kerbals are one-part ships when on EVA...

One minor request: At the moment any MM patches would have to operate/not operate in the presence of any KJR variant. Could you rename the DLL to something like 'KerbalJointReinforcementNext.dll'? If I remember my MM patching creation correctly, that should allow patches to be created that target that directly. (While the folder still being 'KerbalJointReinforcement' means that patches targeting that would still work.)

@Paadwyn - I've had a similar issue, and I have a suspicion on what's causing it. (Untested so far.) Could you try something? Switch from KerbalJointReinforcementContinued to KerbalJointReinforcementNext and put in the following patch: @PART[OrbitalKitContainer2] { MODULE { name = KJRExcluded } } https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/184206-kerbal-joint-reinforcement-next/ My suspicion is that KJR is setting up joint connections to the center of DIY Kit, and not adjusting them as the size of the kit changes. The above steps should exclude it from being reinforced. (You could also try just removing KJRc. I don't believe KJRc has a simple way to exclude parts, or I’d suggest that.)

Multiple ways helps make sure you aren't stuck without a needed resource for it - You may not be able to find a good place to mine gypsum, or minerals, or even ore - but on any given body you should be able to find a place to mine *one* of them.

Is there a way to specifically exempt a specific part? I want to try exempting the Orbital DIY kit from GroundConstruction - I'm having an issue with a test build where it will deploy but at some point during deployment (or, if I'm time-warped through it, at the end of time-warp) the station I've got it attached to goes wonky. My suspicion is that the deployment changes the size of the kit, and the joints aren't being resized to fit it.

MKS has a set of user-supplied patches that as far as I know are still working fine with EL. If you have Patchmanager you can pick between a few options in-game - or you can move/remove files manually to change them around. There are four separate patch files you can enable/disable: One adds EL abilities to MKS parts, one adds EL abilities to MKS Kerbal classes, one switches EL to use the MKS resource chain, and one hides the EL parts. The one hiding the EL parts is disabled by default. In your case I'd recommend disabling the one to use the MKS resource chain - You'll then be able to build with various appropriate MKS parts, and use Technicians or Mechanics in the place of Engineers if you want to, but you'd still be able to build using the same EL resource chain.

A note brought on by the current issues with Spacedock: It would be nice to be able to move or even close the window while it's still checking for updates.