[KSP v1.1.3] Stock Bug Fix Modules (Release v1.1.3b.1 - 10 Jul 16)

[Red Iron Crown]

@ss8913 You should take it to the CKAN thread, Claw can't fix CKAN.

[ss8913]

8 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

@ss8913 You should take it to the CKAN thread, Claw can't fix CKAN.

If it were still an issue of breaking all CKAN functionality, I'd agree.  At this point it's specifically an issue with this module's metadata.  I'm led to believe that module authors submit the metadata to CKAN for publication.  I'll ask on the CKAN thread, but if I were a CKAN developer and a user reported an issue with one mod broken out of a thousand, I know what I'd tell them, and that's "take it up with that mod's author"   It's just like the ISP vs LEC argument from when I did networking full-time... ISP always wanted to blame the LEC (Local Exchange Carrier) and vice-versa for frame relay issues

[Claw]

1 hour ago, ss8913 said:

I'm led to believe that module authors submit the metadata to CKAN for publication. 

Well, I can only provide info for what I know. And I have never provided metadata for CKAN, ever. I'm not trying to say "it's not my mods fault," but since I have done literally zero work for or with CKAN, I can't speak to it's functionality at all. All I've done in the past was release a config file as a zip, since a CKAN knowlegable person asked me to do that (that file is no longer needed, btw). If there is something about my mod, then I'm happy to try and oblige if someone can provide me some guidance. But I have zero CKAN experience, and I wasn't involved in originally releasing this mod on CKAN.

[kcs123]

@ss8913. like other mentioned, report your issue to CKAN thread. Something went wrong on your side. I have tried both, CKAN install and manual install trough github.
CKAN was installed StockBugFix properly on my machine. Something unusuall went wrong on your side and CKAN staff members are more likely ones that can help you to find out what.

[Red Iron Crown]

1 hour ago, ss8913 said:

I'll ask on the CKAN thread, but if I were a CKAN developer and a user reported an issue with one mod broken out of a thousand, I know what I'd tell them, and that's "take it up with that mod's author".

The difference here is that the CKAN people neither request info from nor ask permission of mod authors before adding mods to their repository, nor do they allow others to change metadata. One should never bring up CKAN issues in an individual mod thread, because the mod author 1) likely didn't submit metadata in the first place and 2) can't directly change the metadata anyway.

[Stone Blue]

Claw, First let me apologize profusely if this has been asked before...I skimmed the first and last halfdozen pages, but didnt come across this being discussed:

Any chance you could host this on another host in addition to Github?... I'll take anywhere... Due to some unknown issue, my home router blocks the Github domain, so I cant access anything, unless I traipse my butt and my laptop to a friend's house, whom I only see every couple of weeks...

 

7 hours ago, Red Iron Crown said:

The difference here is that the CKAN people neither request info from nor ask permission of mod authors before adding mods to their repository, nor do they allow others to change metadata. One should never bring up CKAN issues in an individual mod thread, because the mod author 1) likely didn't submit metadata in the first place and 2) can't directly change the metadata anyway.

Hmmm... I can understand the reasoning for this I guess, but this is just another reason why I think I dislike CKAN... lol

Edited December 30, 2015 by Stone Blue

[Claw]

Yes. I don't mind that CKAN is hosting my add-on. But I really do have no idea how it works. My aim with my overhaul in 1.0.5 was to make it easier to manage settings and fixes across updates. That caused some issues with CKAN that I thought were sorted. So it's possible you might have some mixed pieces in there causing a local issue.

2 hours ago, Stone Blue said:

Claw, First let me apologize profusely if this has been asked before

It has been discussed before, but it's been a while. I'm happy to throw it up on dropbox for those who need it. Hopefully this works for you.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/zvud622pgxdcr6r/StockBugFixPlus%20v1.0.5a.3.zip?dl=0

Cheers!

[Stone Blue]

^^
THANK YOU!!

[mreadshaw]

I have a request for a new bug fix. The extend option in the right click menu for antennas disappears once you transmit a science report. Action groups can still toggle the antenna just fine so it seems like a bug to me. As an addition, maybe stock+, I think it would make sense for the antennas to only retract once you have sent a science report if they were retracted before. Basically always return the antenna to the state it was in before transmitting.

 

Edit: Reddit thread where the idea/problem came from https://www.reddit.com/r/KerbalSpaceProgram/comments/3z14h1/is_there_any_mods_out_there_except_for_remotetech/

Edited January 1, 2016 by mreadshaw

[Claw]

@mreadshaw Yeah, I agree with all that. I will add that to the list of things to poke at.

[StickyScissors]

I too have a request for a bug fix, if possible. http://bugs.kerbalspaceprogram.com/issues/6298 <<that, some Alt+f12 cheats stopped working in 1.0.5 and there are no workarounds. Someone else had an issue with this on reddit but never got a response :/

[StahnAileron]

Question about ModuleAeroSurfacePlus:

I just installed Lack's SXT parts pack mod. It was specifically for the airbrakes included in it (the wide flat one; I plant them on wings like spoilers). I just tested a small-ish jet with them and turned on the Aero display (F12) to check effectiveness. I noticed they were creating drag in the stowed state. I luckily had a stock AIRBRAKE on this craft as well; it wasn't creating drag.

So the question: Does ModuleAeroSurfacePlus specifically target the stock airbrake or is it suppose to target any part functionally intended to be an airbrake?

I looked at the configs and the only real difference in the SXT part compared to the stock one for ModuleAeroSurface is the transform name (SXT uses "airbrakePlate" and Stock uses "Flap".) Stock does have another module call though, FXModuleLookAtConstraint, so maybe that is factor. I don't think I have any airbrakes from other mods to check against (B9 would've been one, but the latest 1.0.5-compatible release doesn't include them due to technical issues/difficulties; something in the transition to KSP 1.x completely broke them and the devs haven't been able to figure what is wrong.)

It's a minor thing, so it's mainly my curiosity driving me to ask. I know KSP and modding for it can get quirky at time.

[Claw]

On 1/2/2016 at 4:07 AM, StickyScissors said:

I too have a request for a bug fix, if possible.

I'll have a look, but stuff in the debug menu might be kinda low on the priority list.

On 1/3/2016 at 10:24 PM, StahnAileron said:

Does ModuleAeroSurfacePlus specifically target the stock airbrake

It targets ModuleAeroSurface. So any part that uses that module should be affected. The only extra caveat being that the way the stock airbrake works is by using a LIftRating with a zero lift curve. That effectively means the airbrake acts like a control surface with only drag and no lift. So when a fully stock airbrake is streamline to the wind, it creates very little drag. The problem is that a stowed airbrake on the side of a fuselage (or fuel tank) generates a lot of drag when the craft goes a little off prograde, even though it's actually flush to the fuselage and wouldn't really crate extra drag on it's own.

 

What I've done is assume that if the airbrake is stowed, that it's flush to the fuselage and generates zero drag by fiddling with the lift rating. So, if the addon part isn't working similar to the stock airbrake, it might not be working as expected. The transform name shouldn't matter since I don't fiddle with that.

[Black-Talon]

Still really appreciating these fixes Claw!

I would like to repetition for links to additional fixes (or plus like featurelets) be linked to in this section of your fantastically organized and pinned thread.

On 10/18/2014 at 4:08 AM, Claw said:

Links to other Bug Fix modules

Cleared out for 1.0.5...

Specifically coming to mind as supper-duper-awesome-and-helpful to the common player (and should be fixed/added to the game imo):

Menu Stabilizer - make any part right-click menu freeze its position on the screen in flight when the mouse is above any part of it

FlightDefFreeCam - sets the free camera as the default

FlightDefPrecision - sets precise / caps lock controls as the default

MapShowNavBall - shows navball on the map by default

Thanks for considering this humble suggestion!

I do realize that the list gets long quickly, so maybe just pick your favorites if that's the issue. I just hate to see so many good tweaks get overlooked when there is such a perfect place for them to be linked from. They're generally difficult for players to find unless they know it exists and what it is called. They rarely if ever get the spotlight. Heck, I have a hard time finding them again when setting up a new install! It wouldn't hurt to pick your favorite modules from Malah or Magico13 or link to their master listings. They also have some of my favorite gems like QuickSearch, QuickBrake, and Dated QuickSaves.

[Psycho_zs]

Claw, have you ever looked at phantom forces produced by kerbals on ladders? These forces are strong enough to turn ships or even accelerate them by dozens of m/s (rescuing kerbals stranded in lightweight airlock parts is a pain, they often turn into magic rockets zipping away).

Edited January 7, 2016 by Psycho_zs

[Drew Kerman]

small oversight in your part highlight disabler, @Claw - it doesn't suppress highlighting when you are looking through a Hullcam VDS camera. However you can probably look at the code for GlowSupressor to get a fix for this, as when I had it installed under 1.0.5 I didn't see any part highlighting even when looking through cameras (while Stock Bug Fixes' highlighter suppression was disabled). It spams NREs though so better off being rolled into your implementation.

[Claw]

On 1/6/2016 at 10:39 PM, Black-Talon said:

I would like to repetition for links to additional fixes

Good idea. I will try to update this week (it's been busy).

7 hours ago, Psycho_zs said:

Claw, have you ever looked at phantom forces produced by kerbals on ladders?

I haven't, actually. Though I did build a kerbal powered glider once and flew it to the island runway.

I'm not sure if I could do much about this, since it's probably inherent to the engine in some way. Might be worth a look at some point though. They do seem to have a lot of "push" for their size.

28 minutes ago, Gaiiden said:

However you can probably look at the code

Point taken on the need to fix the highlight disabler some more. I think I looked at the glow suppressor before, and I believe it runs through every vessel, and every part, on every frame. I was hoping to avoid that, but it might be the only "sure fire" way to make sure the glow is turned off for everyone. Though it gives me some ideas that I can try to implement.

[numerobis]

Congrats -- your pilot RSAS fixes my rocket, which stock SAS overcorrects to disaster. Finally I can get my passengers to Mun and back.

[DefOnslaught]

I love this, but I have one issue. The Fairing Bug fix for the Center of lift and drag, isn't fixed for me. All the other Fairing fixes work. I'm also running KSP in Dx11.

Installed Mods:

Asteroid Day,

Active Texture Management,

Astronomer's Visual Pack,

DDSLoader,

DistantObject,

Kerbal Alarm Clock,

Kerbal Engineer,

Planet Shine,

Texture Replacer,

Toolbar

Edited January 9, 2016 by DefOnslaught
Forgot some information.

[Claw]

9 hours ago, numerobis said:

Finally I can get my passengers to Mun and back.

Excellent! It's not a particularly aggressive fix, but I'm glad it's useful for you.

 

7 hours ago, DefOnslaught said:

The Fairing Bug fix for the Center of lift and drag, isn't fixed for me.

What are you using to tell if the fairing lift is/isn't fixed? If you are looking at the overlay, there are still some bugs there that I left unfixed (because I didn't want to waste CPU time fixing the overlay). It might help me better if you have a picture showing the issue, or could describe a bit more what you're using to tell you there's a problem still.

 

Thanks!

[DefOnslaught]

4 minutes ago, Claw said:

Excellent! It's not a particularly aggressive fix, but I'm glad it's useful for you.

 

What are you using to tell if the fairing lift is/isn't fixed? If you are looking at the overlay, there are still some bugs there that I left unfixed (because I didn't want to waste CPU time fixing the overlay). It might help me better if you have a picture showing the issue, or could describe a bit more what you're using to tell you there's a problem still.

 

Thanks!

I use the Aerodynamic Overlay and the Center of Lift is above the Fairing by a fair amount. Once I get to about 6000m and begin my Gravity Turn the center of lift pulls my nose down out of my control.

[robson1000]

7 hours ago, DefOnslaught said:

I use the Aerodynamic Overlay and the Center of Lift is above the Fairing by a fair amount. Once I get to about 6000m and begin my Gravity Turn the center of lift pulls my nose down out of my control.

This looks like a problem I have:

Spoiler

Example Craft: https://www.dropbox.com/s/yp0bempwrl6078q/Example Craft.craft?dl=0

Tested on stock game.

[Claw]

11 hours ago, robson1000 said:

Tested on stock game.

Are you using my fixes? Because I just flew this and it seems to check out for me.

 

[DefOnslaught]

2 minutes ago, Claw said:

Are you using my fixes? Because I just flew this and it seems to check out for me.

 

I have everything besides the Wheel and PilotSAS turned on.

Picture of my Mod folder
http://puu.sh/mr0zn.png 

[robson1000]

12 hours ago, Claw said:

Are you using my fixes? Because I just flew this and it seems to check out for me.

Sorry, it was stock game, my mistake.

After some tests, I modified one of ships (removed all mods parts), with Stock Bug Fix (latest version), this bug is still there.

Spoiler

This is that ship: https://www.dropbox.com/s/7lmqfe917bswrkq/Eve Station 3_1.craft?dl=0

Sorry for my English.