View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001478 | FSSCP | user interface | public | 2007-08-27 01:07 | 2008-03-31 08:20 |
| Reporter | jcmdev0 | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | normal | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | no change required | ||
| Product Version | 3.6.10 | ||||
| Summary | 0001478: Accept button does not leave barracks menu in HEAD | ||||
| Description | Clicking on the accept button in the barracks seems to have no effect. It looks like someone commented out some code to suppress the missing campaign file check, but they also hit the return to main menu-path. The patch provided is mostly a pointer to the place in the code. I'm not sure whether the missing campaign check should be reinstated, or whether to remove it. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
2007-08-27 01:07
|
barracks_accept_fix.diff (774 bytes)
Index: code/menuui/barracks.cpp
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/fs2source/cvsroot/fs2_open/code/menuui/barracks.cpp,v
retrieving revision 2.31
diff -u -r2.31 barracks.cpp
--- code/menuui/barracks.cpp 28 Dec 2006 00:59:27 -0000 2.31
+++ code/menuui/barracks.cpp 26 Aug 2007 20:52:20 -0000
@@ -1241,9 +1241,10 @@
/*if (Campaign_file_missing) {
popup(PF_USE_AFFIRMATIVE_ICON, 1, POPUP_OK, XSTR( "The currently active campaign cannot be found. Please select another...", -1));
gameseq_post_event(GS_EVENT_CAMPAIGN_ROOM);
- } else {
- gameseq_post_event(GS_EVENT_MAIN_MENU);
+ break;
}*/
+ gameseq_post_event(GS_EVENT_MAIN_MENU);
+
} else {
gamesnd_play_iface(SND_GENERAL_FAIL);
|
|
|
That is something that WMCoolmon broke a while back, and it's been on my todo list of things to fix once 3.6.10 ships. Basically, the missing campaign check shouldn't have been commented out in the first place, since it's a guard against data corruption. |
|
|
Ok, good luck getting 3.6.10 together. |
|
|
Marking this as "no change required", even though it will be fixed. Since the unstable tree is getting a do-over, and will be merged into a stable tree copy, this particular bug isn't going to end up in the future unstable tree. So, it's sort of a broken, but not actually broken, situation. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2007-08-27 01:07 | jcmdev0 | New Issue | |
| 2007-08-27 01:07 | jcmdev0 | File Added: barracks_accept_fix.diff | |
| 2007-08-27 04:49 | taylor | Note Added: 0008413 | |
| 2007-08-27 10:06 | jcmdev0 | Note Added: 0008416 | |
| 2008-03-31 08:20 | taylor | Status | new => closed |
| 2008-03-31 08:20 | taylor | Note Added: 0009098 | |
| 2008-03-31 08:20 | taylor | Resolution | open => no change required |
