Skip to content

Updated Release Candidate Viewer: Second Life 1.18.6 RC1 Available Today!

Update Realease

Wednesday, December 12th, 2007 at 4:03 PM PST by: Bridie Linden

Second Life 1.18.6 Viewer Release Candidate (RC1) is now available for download. Please go to the test software page to download and try these pre-production viewers.

REMINDER: Release Candidates (RC) are intended for evaluation purposes. Please try them out only if you want to participate in the bug reporting process and identify issues before these become the default viewer. You can have both a Release Candidate and a production viewer installed on your computer at the same time, so if issues are encountered when testing an RC you can switch back to the production viewer.

Changes:

  • Change crash logger “Remember this choice” function to default to on
  • Connect button now has focus on login screen
  • Inventory folder loading state now more clearly indicated

Fixes:

  • VWR-3558: llLoadURL cannot be muted
  • VWR-3428: Checking a users profile while editing a linked set causes viewer crash
  • Viewer channel and version numbers reported incorrectly during login
  • Inventory cache version number incorrectly incremented, leading to perceved loss
  • Age verification status hard to read in the profile field

Source code drop coming soon.

Please continue to report any new issues in the Issue Tracker and be sure to set “Affects Version/s” to “1.18.6 Release Candidate“.

Thank you!

41 Responses to “Updated Release Candidate Viewer: Second Life 1.18.6 RC1 Available Today!”

  1. Eclaire Looming Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 4:21 PM PSTfine another day with serious reliability questions…would help if you just were honest with us about the problems you see and how you will solve them
  2. Celierra Darling Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 4:45 PM PST“Age verification status hard to read in the profile field” – isn’t this supposed to not exist? That is, isn’t age verification status *not* supposed to appear in profiles? See SVC-1032 (http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-1032).
  3. Eclaire Looming Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 5:16 PM PSTwell bridie now can you get voice working tonite?
  4. la le lu Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 5:22 PM PSTreleascandidates also means there are 2 or more concurent versions. i just see one version. where are the other candidates?
  5. Ninamori Writer Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 5:30 PM PSTyeah id have to agree with #2 on this, why fix what isnt suppsed to be their? i mean if anything you should be removeing it…
  6. the bat Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 5:48 PM PSTAge verification status hard to read in the profile field
    450 posts in no time at all on that topic — RC release , 6 so far – doesn’t that tell a story ??
  7. Ninamori Writer Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:08 PM PSTfyi #6 “Age verification status hard to read in the profile field” ISNT supposed to be their AT ALL. your not supposed to be ABLE to tell if someone is age verified.
  8. Argent Stonecutter Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:11 PM PST*sigh*Yet another “scarlet letter”.
  9. U M Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:12 PM PST@2 well they can`t fix things they have no way of understanding right? They can only fix what they know about.
  10. Vanessa Sakai Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:14 PM PSTI age verified last week, why is it showing not age verified? I know that a lot of people have verified but no one is showing as verified.
  11. Vanessa Sakai Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:17 PM PSTSorry about the double post, but to be clear, I am showing as verified on the website, but not the viewer.
  12. Rocky Merosi Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 6:51 PM PSTI have the camera controls up all the time. When I start this version and the one before it as well, the camera controls box comes up on the login screen before I even login. If I close it, it is closed once I login as well.
  13. U M Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 7:14 PM PSTI understand the coders are limited to their understanding of how you repair broken or build a workerable UI. But someone earlier said.where did you come up with some of their fixes?
  14. Rascal Ratelle Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 7:53 PM PST‘“Age verification status hard to read in the profile field” ISNT supposed to be their AT ALL. your not supposed to be ABLE to tell if someone is age verified.’What ever happend to our rights to privacy?
    Or did we give that up when we clicked the agree button on the ToS window?
  15. Phoxpaws Vollmer Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:08 PM PSTHow come if we did the age verify things and it was ok, it doesn’t show it in the client????
  16. Untameable Wildcat Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:54 PM PSTTo all who are asking if it should be showing: Presumably you should be able to see it to be able to decide whether or not to ban someone from your land, even if you don’t impose the blanket ban by flag – I think this is the logic behind it.Of course, they could solve the problem by removing it altogether, but that would be WAY too simple.
  17. U M Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 8:58 PM PSTGiving highly personal data to LL? Just to be here passport number/ OMG doesnt anyone else think thats a little scary? Or Just a nightmare of a leak to happen? Whats next we have to give our blood to proof who we are this is just nuts!
  18. mimi Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 9:09 PM PSTI think it will make it far more easier for those with bad intentions to hunt on kids if the IDV will be mentioned. Now kids are relatively safe from predators, since it’s hard to tell which people are underage and which aren’t.
    Mentioning verification status will make it easier to guess who are the real life kids, instead of harder. And make it easier for those with bad intentions to get a grip on their real life. Kids can be far more hurt by real life abuse than by any pixelsex they could ever see on the grid.
  19. The Grid Live » Second Life News for December 13, 2007 Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:01 PM PST[…] Second Life Blog Updated Release Candidate Viewer: Second Life 1.18.6 RC1 Available Today! Quote from the site – Second Life 1.18.6 Viewer Release Candidate (RC1) is now available for […]
  20. Sean Heying Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:11 PM PSTHow come I provided my personal details at great risk of identity theft and was verified yet… my profile shows I am *NOT* verified?What gives?Is this all a farce by Robin to get us to submit even more details? Or have you guys messed up the Y/N flag we obtained at great personal risk and now we have to do it all again?
  21. U M Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:14 PM PST identity theft ………………that is a risk we take now. I fam or protecting children, but its not our problem LL is dum enough to allow or continue under age kids,kowning who they are reguardless.
  22. Tegg B Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:45 PM PSTBig deal, other residents can tell I’m over 18 because I’m verified.
    Oh you’re not verified or can’t get into the restricted sim? You must be a 8yo kid about to pounced on by all those predators out there.
  23. U M Says:
    December 12th, 2007 at 11:56 PM PSTYour on the forum and trolling people ( as Conan G )in now you back here again? I muted you on the forum for trolling…..Please stop
  24. Nadine Nozaki Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 12:42 AM PSTHow come my negative comments end up in moderation?
  25. Nadine Nozaki Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 12:43 AM PSTNot to be like that but the database used for age verifications is a joke. A simple quiz, name three artists that sold records in the 80’s would probably give more accurate hits on how is below 18 or not. Also the goal number that was ok start with was 1 of five fails. Made up ID’s from scamming privacy leakages was ok. (i head fake data feed into flickr somehow age verified, vile no true swedish info so far have done.) To get age verified is about as hard as google -> id… take first hit and you can verify. (Aristotilie also did that in hope of making there spam data base as big as possible.)I hope these scam don’t dive any extra legal protection, for that the only think I can be about. There isn’t even a try to make sure the information is correct. And land owners that care about minors please, please don’t do the age verifications stuff, it will not help against kids just give them help in finding your stuff.
  26. Mercia McMahon Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 1:28 AM PSTSean, its not that you are not verified, its just that the Profile says Not Verified, I have set up a trial age verfiied parcel and confirmed that my beta verification is set to yes, no matter what a misconceived box in the Profile says.
  27. Tegg B Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 1:49 AM PSTI thought I was on the forum trolling as you or are we someone else?
  28. Nadine Nozaki Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 2:37 AM PST@18, mini: You mean that most Age verified avatars is kids making them easier for the grown up (not caring about age verification) to find? The system used have been proved to be to easy to fool so it will not give ANY protection about id the avatar is minor or adult.We know that mush less that 80% of grown up can get age verified, so insisting on age verifications if you try to make a living is super stupid. It’s for most resident easier to fool the system (google for a drivers licence) that to get correctly verified. (RL info don’t work). This is a stupid cover up actions that should have been stop at the first warning signs. Running allong the track isn’t going to help, the train will catch up with you, get of the track let this train pass and try to think of something new that works. (CC cards are much better at the monent as them getting stolen the issuer actually cares about…)
  29.  nahona Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 2:39 AM PSTOk Lindens, i sended you my information for each of my 3 premiums account, your Website say now “You have already verified your age”, So why all my 3 premiums accounts show me in their own profile “Not age-verified” ???what’s the mess ? did you’r Manual Verify procedure not working for Setting the in-world Flag, or the may be the whole procedure fail to set the in-world Flag…that’s wonderfull… Linden logics, Add Features, don’t test it enough, entroduce new bugs, fix small amount off old one, let’s hope and go ahead…Oh yeah GOOD JOB Guys !
  30. Argent Stonecutter Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 4:01 AM PSTSounds like the guys on the server side are on the ball, conforming to what Linden Labs has promised and NOT sending the age verification data to the viewer, but the viewer guys didn’t get the memo.
  31. mimi Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 6:25 AM PST@ 28 I mean (in the case IDV would work well, not like it is now) having the verification status in the profile would make it easier for peadophilles/pedosexuals to find out whe the real life kids are, since in the ideal case most RL adults will verify, so they know the ones who are not verified are the kids.I don’t think we will have to worry much about it now, since there are many adult people who do not trust LL and integrity enough to verify, but once that’s cleared up it may become a problem.
  32. Karl Dorance Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 7:23 AM PSTSame problem as the previous viewer, it still crashes on startup. Someone please fix this.
  33. Rocky Merosi Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 9:37 AM PSTOk here is my question. Is every blog post that mentions age verification going to trigger everyone to complain about it? Last I saw this was a post for the release candidate that mentioned a problem with the age verification and how it appears on profile. There are other blog posts that deal with age verification specifically. Can we please get back on topic and if you want to whine and complain about the age verification post to a blog about that specifically and NOT the blog about a release candidate so that those that really have comments about the CLIENT can have room to post. I am not saying its wrong to comment on age verification. I am just asking that the correct blog be used. Thanks everyone
  34. Chantal Ingraham Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 9:59 AM PSToh noooooo please not again more bugs! Better fix the Sim issues then a new viewer LOL
  35. Montana Corleone Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 10:06 AM PSTi mean, it’s not even working, almost the entire world outside of the US is failing Age Verification. 5 IDs for me from two countries, not got any left to try….And yes, can you fix the stuff before adding more new lag and load. And could you tell us more on the asset server update fiasco. 4 hours to add it in, 3 and 3/4 hours to revert it, sounds like you reverted nearly all of it. Interesting that the day after this, Cory left…
  36. Alyx Sands Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 11:46 AM PSTYou can see in your OWN profile whether you’re age verified or not, not in that of others. And that it isn’t showing in the RELEASE CANDIDATE viewer is just a bug.
  37. Sean Heying Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 11:49 AM PST@26 Maria: I have also set up a 16M2 ageverify parcel in my sim with some could be broadly offensive porn in it. The kids can stand millimeters away… my group can get in – even the kids – as my group is open access. The point is this releases fixes a bug, not.@ 33 Rocky: If the lindens were doing their job and not just the usual Robin Linden “Let them eat cake” crud she love foisting on us the blogs would not have an arbitrary 150 post limit (A year ago there were blogs with 1500+ posts) and there would be more trying to address our concerns.Cory was the wrong one for Philip to fire, Robin is getting worse with each and every policy she and her church dream up.
  38. Alicia Mounier Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 12:27 PM PSTYeah I age verified recently for this beta but it says I’m not age verified. Lol, so am I or not? When I go to the age verify page it says I’m already verified. So I’m guessing that you don’t have info on grid connected with the age verification yet?
  39. the bat Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 12:41 PM PST@33 Ok here is my question. Is every blog post that mentions age verification going to trigger everyone to complain about it?Yeah , as long as all the blog posts about the topic are
    1/ capped at 150
    2/ filled to capacity rapidly
    3/ filled with still unanswered questionsthe issue is obviously very important to a large majority of users and deserves far more space than its had so far to resolve .
  40.  mimi Says:
    December 13th, 2007 at 1:56 PM PST@33
    where else can we reply? the IDV blogs are capped at 150 posts.
    As long as people don’t get an answer, they will keep asking. For many of us beeing able to access some areas is crucial, yet we don’t know what the lindens are up to. I guess we will not ever know either, we will just be pushed into it. Gives good reason to complain.
  41. Tegg B Says:
    December 14th, 2007 at 12:06 AM PSTA year ago we didn’t have these stupid white paddocks of nothingness on each side while you squinted to read the tiny writing in the middle