[GRASS5] BUGS list

GRASS GRASS developer
1

I think a couple things on the BUGS list should be looked at, and maybe
removed:

optri lib for src/libes/geom is removed? Is the BUG something of a moot
point then?

Note for clarity on large set of color rules and GRASS getting slow:
r.in.tiff "quantizes" color rules because the TIFF spec allows a color
range values the size of an unsigned small int, whereas GRASS only
allows 0-256 per band. r.in.tiff can still produce ridiculously large
color rule sets for RGB tiffs.

d.rgb vs. i.composite: I've had a few problems with both. With a large
imagery group, i.composite never finished (after hours!). On the same
data, d.rgb worked but produced junk in the NULL data areas to the east
and south of the image (okay on the north and west NULL data areas).

g.select.pg: Should be fixed (as well as all *.pg modules regarding
this interface).

r.out.tiff: Extension problem fixed. Didn't see the NULL color problem
until just now.

--
Eric G. Miller <egm2@jps.net>

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

2

Hi all,

what is the current status of optri integration?
Shall I or not? Any more copyright problems here?

Markus

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

3

On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:02:41PM +0000, Markus Neteler wrote:

what is the current status of optri integration?
Shall I or not? Any more copyright problems here?

The problem I have found out are still there, AFAIK.
We have to replace most of the code with detri or something else.
I don't know if anybody already started with this.
  Bernhard

--
Professional Service around Free Software (intevation.net)
The FreeGIS Project (freegis.org)
Association for a Free Informational Infrastructure (ffii.org)
FSF Europe (www.fsfeurope.org)

4

On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 01:24:29PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote:

On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:02:41PM +0000, Markus Neteler wrote:
> what is the current status of optri integration?
> Shall I or not? Any more copyright problems here?

The problem I have found out are still there, AFAIK.
We have to replace most of the code with detri or something else.
I don't know if anybody already started with this.

Excuse me - I wanted to write: detri!

So... shall I check in detri? Any objections? Do we need it? :slight_smile:

Markus

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

5

Hi Markus, hi Bernhard,

optri was removed because of copyright issues that could not be resolved
to be compatible with GPL. So the message in the BUGS file about the
optri problem is obsolete.

With detri the license is ok, but there is a another library part of
detri that is not compatible with GPL. This part has to be removed and
changed to c standard library functions.

Next the detri library has a different structure than optri, so that a
simple search & replace or wrapping the library won't work. I have no
clue how much work this is and if/how detri can be adapted to GRASS.

Generally i think that GRASS needs one library for computational
geometry that provides functions that operate on the GRASS data. If
detri is adapted to GRASS in the same way optri was this would be only
another 'hack' to provide some functionality for some stand-alone
modules, but not usable for general programming.

I already wrote down what functionality IMHO is needed, if i find the
mail again i will check the text in for CVS.

cu,

Andreas

Markus Neteler wrote:

On Tue, Jan 09, 2001 at 01:24:29PM +0100, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 06:02:41PM +0000, Markus Neteler wrote:
> > what is the current status of optri integration?
> > Shall I or not? Any more copyright problems here?
>
> The problem I have found out are still there, AFAIK.
> We have to replace most of the code with detri or something else.
> I don't know if anybody already started with this.

Excuse me - I wanted to write: detri!

So... shall I check in detri? Any objections? Do we need it? :slight_smile:

Markus

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

--
Andreas Lange, 65187 Wiesbaden, Germany, Tel. +49 611 807850
Andreas.Lange@Rhein-Main.de - A.C.Lange@GMX.net

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

6

Eric G . Miller wrote:

I think a couple things on the BUGS list should be looked at, and maybe
removed:

optri lib for src/libes/geom is removed? Is the BUG something of a moot
point then?

yes, this is true. See my other mail.

cu,

Andreas

--
Andreas Lange, 65187 Wiesbaden, Germany, Tel. +49 611 807850
Andreas.Lange@Rhein-Main.de - A.C.Lange@GMX.net

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'

7

On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 01:01:51PM +0100, Andreas Lange wrote:

Eric G . Miller wrote:
>
> I think a couple things on the BUGS list should be looked at, and maybe
> removed:
>
> optri lib for src/libes/geom is removed? Is the BUG something of a moot
> point then?
>
yes, this is true. See my other mail.

now it is removed in BUGS :slight_smile:

Thanks,

Markus

----------------------------------------
If you want to unsubscribe from GRASS Development Team mailing list write to:
minordomo@geog.uni-hannover.de with
subject 'unsubscribe grass5'