Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix #6222: Advanced sprite layout sometimes showed incorrect railtype ground tile. #7460

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Apr 8, 2019

Conversation

kiwitreekor
Copy link
Contributor

@kiwitreekor kiwitreekor commented Apr 2, 2019

… ground tile

@TrueBrain
Copy link
Member

TrueBrain commented Apr 2, 2019

How ... did we not know this sooner? Awesome :D

@TrueBrain TrueBrain requested a review from frosch123 Apr 2, 2019
@PeterN PeterN changed the title Fix #6222: Advanced sprite layout sometimes showed incorrect railtype… Fix #6222: Advanced sprite layout sometimes showed incorrect railtype ground tile. Apr 6, 2019
@PeterN
Copy link
Member

PeterN commented Apr 6, 2019

An alternative is to pass 0 instead of total_offset to the layout->PrepareLayout call, so that it is treated the same way as non-advanced layouts.

@planetmaker planetmaker added the backport requested This PR should be backport to current release (RC / stable) label Apr 6, 2019
@PeterN
Copy link
Member

PeterN commented Apr 8, 2019

Okay, my 'solution' doesn't work for the station picker sprite. So I'm going with this.

PeterN
PeterN approved these changes Apr 8, 2019
@PeterN PeterN merged commit bc9b47d into OpenTTD:master Apr 8, 2019
@PeterN PeterN added backported This PR is backported to a current release (RC / stable) and removed backport requested This PR should be backport to current release (RC / stable) labels Apr 8, 2019
@kiwitreekor kiwitreekor deleted the fix-6222 branch Apr 9, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backported This PR is backported to a current release (RC / stable)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants