The International Simutrans Forum

 

Author Topic: New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental  (Read 4171 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Carl

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1571
    • Website
  • Languages: EN
New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental
« on: September 05, 2011, 10:44:03 PM »
For those who don't frequent the pakset boards, here is a release announcement for the newest Simutrans-Experimental compatible pakset: Pak64.experimental.

One of the stated aims of this pakset is to make it easier for new pakset-specific features of Simutrans-Experimental to be tested. (It is planned that all new Experimental features will be incorporated in pak64.experimental.) As such, it may be useful for us to have this thread here to discuss issues/bugs which fall under the banner of Experimental development (rather than pakset development) but which arise from testing of the pakset.

Offline colonyan

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 526
  • Full and Warm
Re: New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental
« Reply #1 on: September 18, 2011, 02:15:12 PM »
minor missing text problem - on train engine menu in the train yard, price detail texts are missing

Offline Carl

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1571
    • Website
  • Languages: EN
Re: New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental
« Reply #2 on: September 18, 2011, 03:08:53 PM »
Thanks for the report, colonyan -- which texts are missing exactly?

Offline colonyan

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 526
  • Full and Warm
Re: New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental
« Reply #3 on: September 18, 2011, 04:43:27 PM »
when you enter the train depot, look upon engine tab. price details are missing.

Offline Carl

  • Devotee
  • *
  • Posts: 1571
    • Website
  • Languages: EN
Re: New ST-Experimental pakset: pak64.experimental
« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2011, 09:16:20 PM »
I've been able to reproduce this bug now. I'm not at all sure what's caused it. However, it seems that it doesn't occur in the latest version of the sources that I'm currently working on, so I assume that this means it will be fixed in 0.2. If not, we should return to the problem then to see what on earth has gone wrong. Thanks again for the report.