Pontiac

As jivaii stated, plus, the reason is technical. Some APIs understand the numpad as being a different key. For instance, the 1 key along the top of your keyboard can be interpreted differently than the 1 key on the number keypad. Others don't and treat standard 1 and num-1 as being exactly the same. The same thing goes with the arrow keys, the / * - and + keys. I can't be certain Linux treats them differently, Windows does and depending on the keyboard API you're using it can be decided in program to treat them differently or not, and I'm not sure Mac stock keyboards even COME with a numpad (My wifes doesn't and I'm a Mac hater so don't think I'mma gonna test the theory).

ALT-F4 [10 char limit]

I started back in 0.20 to go around the Mun. I built a rover that could do it, and I managed to get to several points of interest. I should retry that in 0.23..... hmmmm... Kethane or Munbuggy?

Try starting with the stock Kerbal X. It DOES get into orbit and you can EVA. Make sure your engines are off or throttled down to zero, in a stable orbit and then play. Note that while you're in EVA you're always going to be facing in the direction of the Kerbal will be going forward, so, whatever direction your camera is facing, pressing "W" will adjust the Kerbal so your camera is facing the back of the Kerbal.

Looking forward to the Android version as well, if it ever comes out. Just make sure its available for the Acer a500 using Android v 2.3. :] My HTC One would probably work MAYBE just as a throttle control.

I'm sorry Blizzy, I wasn't calling you out, or the other mod author (I actually don't even know which mod it was TBQH) by ANY stretch of the imagination, but your awesomest-est-est-er-est toolbar API is quite popular, was the most freshest on my mind, but it is NOT the soul reason I'm writing this DLL finder. It was the trigger, yeah, but, there are a couple of other mods out there that package older mod DLLs (Permitted or not, I don't know) into their own package, which causes grief for other mods. It just seemed like a theme the other day, reading through the active threads that conflicting DLLs were a source of problems. So, brain storm, a day of coding (due to a LOT of interruptions from kids and wife, and I'm sure the dog would have got involved if she hadn't been in hot water with me for the past 6 years), and I have a working product that picks off commonly named DLLs. Some tweaks need to be done, and I'll post out the links for download.

I was GOING to say that keybinding might not be permitted through the API SQUAD gives, but then I remember the robotics pack which allows you to bind any key to a certain command. I'm not sure you'll be able to bind CTRL/SHIFT/ALT or anything like that to a particular key combo, but, to different keys, I don't know.

I've noticed a lot of plugin collisions over the last little bit, one of them being authors including the new Toolbar.dll file in their mod, but, not putting it in the 000_Toolbar directory as they should. This got me to thinking about building an application which has to execute OUTSIDE KSP, since it deals with looking up DLL files. I read the rules, and it only makes mention of the addons, no mention of anything else. So long the code is provided, is it still allowed to post links and such to it?

I've been using the station parts since 0.19, my first version of KSP I had. These are awesome. I've been playing 0.23 more now (Skipped 0.21 and 0.22 entirely) due to the recent plugins that help with docking, and my practicing a new type of landing with MJ. My Kethane run landing base and station are in the works, and this is going to be a significant part of it. :] For those that do play with career mode (I don't, and know nothing about how and where parts are put into the tree) where/how would one be able to drop all the parts in so that they're available right off the bat? Others can chime in on this, but would it be simple or difficult?

Check the "Problems with fuel routing" in the first post.

There seems to be some kind of conflict between this mod and Kethane. I'm not the only one. This one is an odd one because Kethane looks to only half load. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/23979-Kethane-Pack-0-8-4-Find-it-mine-it-burn-it%21-Now-w-Toolbar-Critical-bug-fixed?p=861826&viewfull=1#post861826 I had this mod installed first, and it worked right out of the box. I had made a couple of rovers, transferred electricity between them, and was content that it was working. I had left KSP alone for a while. Tonight, I decided I wanted Kethane, so I went and installed it. It LOOKED like it worked, and installed correctly (The grid on the planet is a dead giveaway), but when I started a new Sandbox mode to `play`, no Kethane parts were there. I checked the debug stuff, saw that there was mention of Kethane parts, and stuff, checked the log file and saw that it successfully loaded Kethane stuff, so I was scratching my head over this. I then went backwards in time through Majiirs thread to see if I could find something about Kethane needing to be 'activated' in Sandbox mode, but, came across the aforementioned link first. I removed the Romfarer directory, relaunched, and all the Kethane parts are available. I'm not pinning this on YOU, but just wondering, from your angle, what might the cause be?

What he meant was "Program Files" is do you have KSP stalled via Steam, or in a directory like "c:\Program Files (x86)\Squad\KSP" or "c:\Program Files\KSP" or "c:\Games\KSP 0.23.0". If you have the game installed in "c:\Program Files" or "c:\Program Files x86" you may be running into Windows blocking access to write the configuration file. If you copy the KSP directory, say, to your root C:\ directory, then run, see if you have the same problem

I KNOW there are MJ haters out there, but this is for those that don't want to fully automate, but still need assistance. Just spending the last few hours coming up, and perfecting this checklist has increased my confidence in landing anywhere on any planet (that can be landed on) 100-fold. I've been going back and forth with playing KSP because I can't cope with the multitude of threading my brain has to do to get things done right, not to mention dealing with a 2D interface for a 3D world just doesn't help my situation any. I've spent hours trying to dock, or, trying to land manually and I never EVER get CLOSE within available fuel constraints. So my options were to not bother getting stuff to the ground on the Mun because I couldn't keep track of that many things I need to do to operationally get it done, not to mention deal with human errors of over or under correcting until it was too late. The other option was to let MJ do my landings for me so I can play some of the more interesting aspects of the game that I CAN do. Mainly designing ships and bases and rovers. Since I really REALLY want to play KSP, I decided to remove SOME of the automation I know to be broken with MJ due to the massive amounts of hardware I want to haul to the Mun. I started playing with Smart A.S.S. and came up with a checklist for me to follow, as well as pre-landing sequence. I'm on a machine that has practically zero graphical ability (Ok, enough to play KSP on the mun, but thats about it. It hits about 2fps to launch with any part of Kerbin on the screen) so when I get the opportunity, I'll record a video of doing this landing purely on instruments. I've landed several times on the dark side of the mun, looking directly down at the ground. I'm going to make one 3 part video. One landing on the day side, one landing on the night side, and one landing right by an anomaly. Anyways, here's my check list. Setup Custom Window: Surface Info 2: - Altitude (bottom) ** Any reference to "Altitude" refers to THIS value - Vertical Speed ** I'll always refer to this as Vertical Speed - Surface Horizontal Speed ** Any reference to just "Speed" refers to THIS value - Suicide burn countdown ** Use only as a reference. When you get close (We're talking just a few 10s of meters) to your landing point, this number becomes irrelevant. (We're not using Surface Speed - Its on your navball) Setup for Smart A.S.S.: (Hense forth SASS) Surf: * HDG: Anything (I use 0 typically to keep one of the two solar panels in direct sunlight, but it doesn't matter.) * PIT: 90 (Important) * ROL: Anything Left hand Pos: * Baby finger on CTRL * Ring finger on SHIFT * Fore Finger on X * Thumb resting OFF of the space bar * Middle finger in the air. MJ Windows open, left to right: * Surface Info 2 * Navball * SASS * Warp Helper. * * Warp To = Maneuver Mode - Set for "5s" * Maneuver Planner (Place to right of Warp Helper) * * Used to "Clear Node" quickly. This could be optional. (The gray text is completely optional) Pre-Landing sequence while in orbit: Align inclination to line up as close as possible with where you want to land. Maintain an orbit if possible. After some practice, you'll be able to correct during descent. Ensure Landing Gear is Down **QUICK SAVE** Descent Notes: My "Debugging" orbit was at about 140km from mun surface Keep Vertical Speed IN THE NEGATIVES AT ALL TIMES. * Otherwise your ship will start flipping around depending what mode SASS is in. Landing Sequence (EASY PART - lots of time to correct for mistakes) Set for Planet View Ensure Navball is visible In SASS set Orbit Horizontal --> Back and hit EXECUTE. Wait for Navball to settle Engage maximum throttle Bring target landing point close (But not directly on) to where you want to land (Roughly 10-20km away on the horizontal?) Kill engine when satisfied Set a maneuver node so it is just above where you want to land. This should be roughly 30-40km above the POI. Time Warp to node Clear node when the navball starts moving once out of warp. (Just a preference of mine) Start burn to roughly zero out speed. (Important to get it as close to 0m/s, but 1-10k/sec is OK depending on altitude as the descent will correct this) Set SASS to Surface Velocity --> Back and hit EXECUTE (This is the mode that will slowly zero out horizontal speed as we descend) Switch to Ship view. Manually Warp to about 10-15k above surface if needed. (INTERESTING PART - You're committed now) Always try keep vertical speed at roughly 10-25% of true altitude. At about 2km above surface, verify horizontal speed - Should be in the mm/s range at this point. Click SURF and EXECUTE. (DIFFICULT, MEMORIZE THE NEXT PART) At the intervals of 1,500m, 500m, 250m, and 100m, zero out or match 10% of altitude to vertical velocity. If you're altitude is 1500, keep the speed at -150m/s. The closer to 10% you maintain, more fuel savings. Below 25-50m, keep ring finger (CTRL) and pointer finger (X) active keeping your vertical speed between 0 and -5m/s On landing, hit X. ---- Some of the advantages of doing this is you'll get used to keeping an eye on the "Surface Info 2" pane and not on the ship, or on the ground. You'll be able to work in some time to correct mistakes at the lower altitudes, redirect to a different location while enroute, etc.

Honestly, no, I did not read the code Majiir posted, and just now I acknowledged the property. I glanced at the 'logic' posted by Majiir but didn't run the line-by-line through the compiler in my head. It's past midnight and I'm off the clock. If its checking the MINOR version and not the BUILD, I'm still iffy, but still against. True it'd be LESS reports, and it'd only happen when Squad releases a major-minor build, but the fact of the matter is that its reports. You'll get reports with or without it. Lets say that after a week into 0.24 you decide KSP just isn't for you, and you walk away without a g'bye. People are going to ransack your mod and post it somewhere outside of your control. Rebranded or otherwise. Now, looking at a change from 0.23.0 to 0.24.0 and not 0.23.0 to 0.23.1, OK, sure, fine, it isn't going to cause a massive fiasco every day of the week, but this is a type of DRM that has LEGAL consequences if the product were to become of age. I've not heard of anyone going to court over a KSP mod yet, but, hey, stranger things have happened. Since I have been, or will be, picking on Majiir, I know he's got a very restrictive license stating at least that no redistribution is permitted. If I were to push something out for Kethane, and he found out about it, and wanted to put the effort into charging me, he's got the rights to do so, and probably would succeed. I'm not saying he WOULD. He'd probably be very pissed off at me, but, hey.. I'm just a peon on the interwebz. Irrelevant. What the [good/bad/working/non-working] code is doing isn't what I'm questioning. I fully acknowledge that stuff could break from KSPs version to version, or even build to build. I'm questioning the restrictions imposed that require someone to load up a compiler to play the game the way they want to play. I get that your contribution to the community is yours and I may sound like I'm being an entitled prick, but I assure you the angle I'm on doesn't even come close to that topic. If I get pissed off enough that I can't play my game the way I want to play my game using YOUR MOD on MY TIME, I seriously would take that as a major COMPLIMENT to your work, not as a sense of entitlement. You can act on that in three ways The first way, from the day that Squad releases the new version of KSP, until the time you punch out another release, all support questions are null and void. They don't exist. They were never read by your eyes. If some well meaning user puts out a config out there, so be it. You didn't put it out there, any MENTION to the new config becomes null and void. Once the people who have gotten the new config note that you've released a new version, they're PROBABLY going to download the newest version ANYWAYS. But what to do with the people sitting on 0.22 and you're DRM is set to 0.23? Well.... You can't support what you don't run? Depending on your license, and if you really want to go that far, you can even report the user who posted the config change since it'd be outside of your distribution setup, and it can be considered an important part of your package. The second way, develop the thick skin I developed and inform users that if they use the software in unintended ways, the software is going to work in unintended ways. LET them scream and shout and let it all out (background music). The worst thing that can happen to you is they don't use your mod. The third way is open a new thread for each release of your product, and start with a brand new clean slate. The forum software used here isn't the best for software distribution. Unless permissions are given to let the OP have total control over the entire thread, you're going to develop a lot of garbage that no one is going to read if you have multiple versions of your product in one thread. Look at MJ. Change the old thread title to a tag of "[uNSUPPORTED]" and leave it at that. Its great that you seem to think that you have to answer every single question and answer to every complaint on the internet relating to your product. Bottom line is that you owe us nothing and we (the decent ones) owe you gratitude for enhancing our experience. You don't have to reply to any question, nor complaint. You can even just post updates, and NEVER reply to a single question. We don't pay you, we don't give you anything other than maybe an ego boost. Sure as hell there are griefers out there that shouldn't be using a computer, but, well, thats the internet. Selfish reasons are selfish reasons. They're personal, and not relevant to this discussion, but don't take a microsecond thinking that I don't understand and KNOW your selfish reasoning. I didn't attempt the fix to AotF to bring in the bajillions of dollars I wanted. I didn't do it to become famous as I should have been. I did it because I was driven to annoyance with the issue at hand. I also knew that other people were going to have the same problem, so with looking at the source code in PSPad and thinking I understood enough of it, I downloaded two different compilers, got both working with the OAs code, examined the code, found the fix, pushed it out the door. I didn't do anything more to it. TBQH I don't even know if my "fix" is what started the null references you mentioned. It was a bit of an ego boost to have a few people thank me profusely for the fix. I even was offered a non-paying job out of it because of a discussion I had about enhancements I COULDN'T do. NEITHER of those reasons were why *I* pushed myself to fix the problem, but the primary reason WAS to promote the vision of rockets and happiness. With full respect to you and EVERY other single modder in ANY game, not only KSP, if you want to throw the DRM into your tools and addons, then by all means do so. I most certainly can't and won't stop you. But fully expect people to get work arounds faster than you can push an update. I have published, working software, used in the insurance industry, that IS loaded with DRM. If I die, that program dies at next renewal. If you die (And seriously, I do hope you live to mid-nineties :]), legally speaking, I'm not out much as I have the know-how create an environment to rebuild, but, anyone who CAN'T recompile, well, there goes their fun until someone re-makes your product, or they have to learn patience and await for your fix. Disclaimer: I'm usually the one that ignores the warnings. I know they're there, but I also know that I could turn my CPU into C4. I tinker. Thats me. Others shouldn't own a computer or have access to a forum because they're entitled rats. Then again, some of those rats might just be hitting a linguistic barrier that makes it SOUND like they're entitled. ... then again.. some just think they are because of their nationality.... (*shivers at that past store work-day*) And here is my point. The source code exists for everyone to use and compile. Its there, character for character, as you typed it out and distributed. Its either packaged in the zip file or put out on a source code tracker that is accessible. (I can't remember if the code HAS to be in the archive or not, but not relevant). You can't guarantee that that the DLL isn't going to be redistributed outside your required channels, so whether the config file gets distributed, or a DLL gets distributed, you're going to lose control if too many people get pissy about the updates, and you're still going to hear the screaming. The ONLY thing you're doing is slowing the pace from the '3rd party patch' to be released by hard coding the version check. If you're as active and as attentive as Majiir, then you've got no worries. However, you're going to get yelled at in your forum thread when you've not pushed an update 3 days later, if at all.

TLDR; ***The DLL should verify the version of KSP against a Key=Value in a version.txt file that lives in the same directory as the DLL.** Personally, I despise the idea of having a plugin forcibly locked out from game play because of a version change with no option as a workaround without a little bit of effort. Come on, 0.23.0 to 0.23.1 and ALL affected plugins DIE? I can understand MAJOR revision changes, but even then, the change I made to Actions On The Fly worked for 0.20 and all the way through 0.23 WITH NO MODIFICATION TO CODE. Hell the original version the original author posted still works from 0.19.0, albeit with the single bug I fixed. I'd like to throw my two cents in and say that instead of hard coding a version number into the DLL, a simple text file is included to state what the current version of KSP the mod is supposed to work with. In that text file (Lets call it 'version.txt' and has to be located in the directory of where your DLL exists) a Key=Value setting like CompatVersion=0.23.0. The DLL checks against that value in that key and continues on. If it doesn't then lock out the plugin by all means, please do. However, the users that know how can go in and edit version.txt, make the change for the current version, and make it compatible to see "if things have to be done". Not only is that K=V setting present in the version.txt file, there is also a large wall of text stating that editing the file MAY cause the plugin to not work, etc. TYPICALLY the people who know how to navigate deeply enough into the directory tree to find versions.txt and edit the file should already know what they're doing is changing expectations of the software. I'd even go as far as NOT use an obvious name like version.txt but name it something else and put in the readme what file is needed to be changed in case of a KSP version change. That way, the user would at least have to do some research and be notified that what they're doing goes outside of the bounds of support. (To a dealer: What do you mean you're going to warranty the obviously after-market airbag suspension I installed in my Fiat?) Not to kick up a bees nest about licensing, but I'd wager that 90% of the people who love to play KSP just don't know the difference between a "computer" and a "hard drive". (Don't laugh. I did computer repair work in a mom-and-pop shop for end users for almost 6 years and some of the questions I was asked was just jaw dropping. SUPER intelligent people in their business, I won't question. I got awesome information about the car I drove from a guy who wanted me to fix the sound on his "hard drive". I still deal with that kind of thing in my job today but perhaps twice a year now.) Saying that "Code can be recompiled" may be valid for someone who knows what a compiler is, but to most, going through the process of finding, then downloading a compatible compiler, getting it configured, then getting it working with the code just to compile, then figuring out how to get the code someone else wrote to work as expected, is way out of alignment of the MAJORITY of players. Some mod authors just DO NOT ALLOW redistribution of their work without their consent. That's fine and I can get on board with that, but if a plugin goes out of date, then the author is assumed MIA which means the author can't consent to allowing modifications and/or redistribution, then there is absolutely zero chance that the mentioned user CAN use that plugin with a newer version of KSP. However, if something external to the DLL can be modified, and the user can edit it, then they KNOW that what they're doing COULD break something. Will the plugin eventually break? Yeah, maybe, but no guarantee, of course. But if it was a popular enough mod, someone else will rewrite, and redistribute, but then again, AotF can attest to working through 4 major versions. From KSP v0.19 to v0.20, something changed that affected "Actions On The Fly" in a very minor way (Just a glitch - The "Enable AotF" link repeated itself on the root part), and only because of the open license I was able to affect a change, and legally redistribute. If, say, Kethane were to go stale, I couldn't do that because redistribution can only be done in post #1 of that owners thread. Sure, I could obtain the code, rebuild on my own system, but that is because I have the 30+ years of making &^$# work on a computer that just shouldn't work. (I keep a hammer right next to the machine). But to some, they need a kid to install and update AND put a shortcut on the desktop to even PLAY KSP. (*shivers at those work-time memories*) Bottom line, more people are going to have the knowledge to edit a text file to make a change, but will be FULLY WARNED that the change could affect their game play, but they will at least have the chance to PLAY their game the way they want to, versus those that will have to learn that a hard drive isn't a computer.

After I posted that, i went and actually read Blizzys OP on his post and he suggests adding the code. Personally, I'm still against the idea since updates to his plugin can happen faster than you update yours, not to mention its more overhead for you to include in your package (Unless you're using post-compiling options to automatically archive all required files). Then there is the whole downloading other packages which include his code which COULD be older than what you're currently running, etc, etc. Just adds more confusion, IMHO. Needless to say, I've actually started plugging away at recreating my space station (Last attempt was in 0.20) and YOUR plugin is certainly more refined than macbernicks AotF, but then again, he disappeared shortly after he published.

Thanks for the link. I checked it out and that plugin is indeed better than this one. For those not in the know, and to save you searching; http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/61263

Downloaded it, looked at it, and I'm rather impressed with it. Very nice work. I had to read through the OP to figure out why certain things were happening, and it'll take me a few uses to retain that info so it becomes second hand, but, yeah, this works great. Two additional notes I might add - Don't include the toolbar code (I admit, its useful) if at all possible. I'd suggest that adding an additional menu item when clicking on the root part that displays the dialog. The reason is, the version you're distributing is already old. If the toolbar doesn't exist, you can rely on the right-click on the root part to access the dialog. Put a link up on your OP to the page where the toolbar is and mark it as "Required to download", but at least then, the user would be able to update at their own accord. - Resizable window. I have a couple of monstrosities (Back in 0.20 I think) that had a bunch of groups that were a nightmare to keep tabs on. Had to rely on Notepad to remember whats what.

@Gerhard> You can just plug it in, or remove it at your leisure. It doesn't include a part, and is always available. @Patupi> Its an interesting idea, but above my pay scale. The link I posted with the fix for the multiple commands on the main menu of this plugin was all I contributed. The OP still hasn't come back, but the source code is free to modify and redistribute according to the license. I *MIGHT* have a go at it, but I've only patched and played with some plugins, never added functionality like you're asking.

I have a fix that worked since 0.21, however, SQUAD took down the post. Until the OP comes back, if ever, we'll just have to deal with what SQUAD has given us.

I have just tested this with 0.23.0 and it works just fine.

I haven't had the chance to even get KSP installed. Work and RL FTW! *eyes roll* Off to bed I go now.

I'll be trying this with 0.22 today. I haven't had the chance to install it. Will let everyone know.

The license is pretty clear stating macbernick: April 2013 DO-WHATEVER-YOU-WANT-WITH-THIS-SOURCE-CODE GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE

I just found out about 0.21.1 this AM. Glad it works. :]