Regarding Darrell's query about the trend toward using binary
versions of GRASS, I'll put in my two cents worth.
I have solaris 2.3 and a Sparc20, and when I ordered it, I wasn't
aware that the cc compiler wasn't included. Since GRASS is the
main reason I need a compiler, at all, cc has worked fine. Without
cc, I was faced with the decision of either getting gcc running or
purchasing something, which was not in the budget this year, or
using the binaries.
I chose what I thought was the most straight forward route - binaries.
Unfortunately, the solaris 2.x binaries from the moon did NOT work.
The problems with interactive commands and stderr have not solved
to my knowledge.
I've also had some hesitancy (unfounded?) about using gcc to compile
GRASS on this machine. For me, the problem is not with the documentation
for GRASS compilation, etc. I could use some reassurance that GRASS
compiles as smoothly under one compiler as another. And I see the
potential problems with installing gcc as more daunting than GRASS.
I think overall, it's the issues peripheral to GRASS - Xwindows,
compilers, graphics cards, operating systems - that have given
me the most trouble, not GRASS, itself.
Marilyn Ruiz
ruiz@thales.geog.ufl.edu