PostFrontal Forum
PostFrontal Forum
LK8000_Support_Forum | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 LK8000 International Support
 Change requests and new features list
 PROSOAR.DE and import of cup-task-files

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List

* Forum Code is ON
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]


T O P I C    R E V I E W
ernst-dieter Posted - 24/05/2012 : 15:55:51
There is a new web site "" at which you can (apart from other things) plan your task easily and graphically.
The export of the resulting task file ist to seeyou and xcsoar.
And the seeyou-task-file is ASCII (cup).

As a suggestion; it would be nice to be able to import these seeyou-cup-task-files.
8   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Coolwind Posted - 25/05/2012 : 17:05:56
Yes, task format will be textual in LK, but I cannot say if this will happen before or after summer.
ernst-dieter Posted - 25/05/2012 : 16:53:04
Apart from the above discussion, Paolo, what do you think about the import possibility of the described seeyou-cup-task-files? Any chance?
Coolwind Posted - 25/05/2012 : 16:44:40
It was an attack because it was subtly suggesting to the sport committee that the LK competition version was useless and anyone could fake it.
It was worthless because this assertion was just plain FALSE.
And it seems you dont even understand why, although you are supposed to be a developer in xcsoar team.
But I shall explain it once more to you, for the next time.
Your supposely faked version of LK Competition will not pass any test of checksums over the executable.
It is like printing money with a Canon printer.

I dont want to have anything to share with you guys. Have a nice time.

staylo2 Posted - 25/05/2012 : 15:51:47
I don't understand how this patch can simultaneously be 'an attack' and 'worthless'. The recent 'FLARM validator' executable (which can make any IGC file appear to be an approved trace generated by an IGC-approved FLARM logger) is an example of what I'd call an 'attack' because it drastically reduced the technical ability required to circumvent the security. But I think the point Max was making is that for someone with enough technical ability to compile the code, it's extremely trivial to bypass any functionality lockout - whether the code in question is LK8000's 'competition edition' or the 'No Horizon' release of XCSoar. The technical ability required to compile the code is much higher than that required to independently construct the patch.

I see no reason why Max contributing to XCSoar should stop him from expressing his individual opinion, and I definitely don't think 'removing' him from the team would stop him :)

Feel free to move (ie copy and paste the text, or link back) this discussion to the XCSoar forum at - preferably not the mailing lists.
Coolwind Posted - 25/05/2012 : 11:43:13
No it is not pretty clear at all. This was a deliberate attack to our work.
Simply because that patch is worth nothing! Do you think we are all stupid here?

This shame is permanently blocking any cooperation between our projects until Kellermann is removed from your team. I dont want to deal with Kellermann and with people around him.
If this is not enough clear, I will come on xcsoar forum soon invading it with messages explaining the whole thing.

Now please, for the last time,stop writing on this forum or you will get my answers directly on yours.

staylo2 Posted - 25/05/2012 : 10:35:26
The link is

It's pretty clear that Max meant it as a demonstration of the futility of competition / no horizon versions (including the no horizon variant of XCSoar). I find it very hard to believe anyone capable of compiling a version of LK8000 or XCSoar would have had problems constructing this patch independently.
Coolwind Posted - 25/05/2012 : 01:03:33
btw Tobias you must have some problems understanding what I asked you by email, and in public here.

In case people is wondering: why doesnt LK want to accept any contribution from xcsoar, here is one latest reason, a real shame.

A few weeks ago we delivered the "competition version" , to fullfill some US rules.
With much surprise, the xcsoar team leader Max Kellermann did publish this amazing message on the usenet.

and particularly

I have already written a patch for LK8000 that pretends to be
"LKCOMPETITION" but doesn't actually disable the horizon:

Given the existence of this patch, contest organizers cannot be sure
whether a pilot's PNA runs an approved LK8000 version or a fake
full-featured version with my patch.

So this is what you call cooperation, helping people, friendship etc.
Do me and us a favour Tobias: unsubscribe and let us forget this shame.

Turbo2 Posted - 25/05/2012 : 00:37:15
btw the stupidsoar task file format is text-based too. it is an XML format and pretty much explains itself. should be easy to implement as there is a least one open-source parser already. :)

PostFrontal Forum © PostFrontal - La community del Volo a Vela Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.12 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000

Since 2006, owned and maintained by PostFrontal S.A.S. di Giuliano Golfieri & c. - VAT ID: IT05264240960
Privacy & Cookie Policy