[GRASS5] html docs from tcltkgrass

GRASS GRASS developer
1

On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 05:57:30PM +0100, mlennert@club.worldonline.be wrote:
> The Ctrl-Mid option to get the html help from within tcltkgrass still expects
> the path to be /usr/local/grass-5.0b/documents/html.
> ^^^^^^^^^
>
> Where is this path defined ?
Just a guess:

check the file
$HOME/.tcltkgrass

That was it. Thanks !

Moritz

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

2

Hi Moritz, Hi Markus,

the path to the html-pages is saved with .tcltkgrass.
I implemented this as a feature.

If you change your installation path, please correct this with:
tcltkgrass
->Config->Options->Configure html-browser.
If you are unsure about the path, simply put $GISBASE/documents/html/ in
the second entry.

I would not recommend to remove the .tcltkgrass file, as it will remove
all user configuration (fonts, window sizes, open windows/x drivers).
This is not the usual behaviour of any application i know.

If we do radical changes on the .tcltkgrass format/internals, we should
set up a new filename (e. g. .tcltkgrass5 ).

cu,

Andreas

mlennert@club.worldonline.be wrote:

> On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 05:57:30PM +0100, mlennert@club.worldonline.be wrote:
> > The Ctrl-Mid option to get the html help from within tcltkgrass still expects
> > the path to be /usr/local/grass-5.0b/documents/html.
> > ^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Where is this path defined ?
> Just a guess:
>
> check the file
> $HOME/.tcltkgrass

That was it. Thanks !

Moritz

----------------------------------------
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'

3

Hello all

Andreas Lange wrote:

I would not recommend to remove the .tcltkgrass file, as it will
remove all user configuration (fonts, window sizes, open windows/x
drivers). This is not the usual behaviour of any application i know.

I agree.

If we do radical changes on the .tcltkgrass format/internals, we
should set up a new filename (e. g. .tcltkgrass5 ).

Unfortunately, I would advise against this. I would suggest that writing
a conversion script is a better way to handle this. All it requires is a
tcltkgrass version as the first line of .tcltkgrass and a small script
to make any necessary changes. Then when the tcltkgrass module is
compiled, it checks for a .tcltkgrass file, checks the version, then
performs the proper substitutions to create an up to date file. At least
this method seems to be used in other programs I've used.

Also, I was going to propose this later but since it has come up, I'll
propose it now. Once we release grass 5 stable, I think we should remove
the version number from directory names and filenames. So grass5 would
just be grass, and grass would be stored in /usr/local/grass by default.
The only problem I can think of is gmake5 since gmake is also the
command for GNU make. But this is solved with a simple name change.

A good argument for this change is our recent hassle we had with wish
and trying to determine whether a wish8.* command was installed. The
final solution was to simply search for wish with no version numbers
since most installations will have wish linked to the appropriate
command. Once the version numbers were gone, life became much easier.
Also, the fewer places we have references to the version number, the
easier it is to change the code when the version changes. It will also
clean up existing code by eliminating $VERSION variables. Therefore, I
propose we remove the version numbers from directory names and
filenames. What do people think?

While I'm at it I will make one more proposal. Throughout the code and
documentation, the .grassrc5 file is almost always referred to as the
"gisrc file". Does anyone object to changing the name from .grassrc to
.gisrc? Of course, this change will be for 5.1.

--
Sincerely,

Jazzman (a.k.a. Justin Hickey) e-mail: jhickey@hpcc.nectec.or.th
High Performance Computing Center
National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC)
Bangkok, Thailand

People who think they know everything are very irritating to those
of us who do. ---Anonymous

Jazz and Trek Rule!!!

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

4

On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 01:33:29PM +0700, Justin Hickey wrote:

Hello all

Andreas Lange wrote:
> I would not recommend to remove the .tcltkgrass file, as it will
> remove all user configuration (fonts, window sizes, open windows/x
> drivers). This is not the usual behaviour of any application i know.

I agree.

> If we do radical changes on the .tcltkgrass format/internals, we
> should set up a new filename (e. g. .tcltkgrass5 ).

Unfortunately, I would advise against this. I would suggest that writing
a conversion script is a better way to handle this. All it requires is a
tcltkgrass version as the first line of .tcltkgrass and a small script
to make any necessary changes. Then when the tcltkgrass module is
compiled, it checks for a .tcltkgrass file, checks the version, then
performs the proper substitutions to create an up to date file. At least
this method seems to be used in other programs I've used.

Also, I was going to propose this later but since it has come up, I'll
propose it now. Once we release grass 5 stable, I think we should remove
the version number from directory names and filenames. So grass5 would
just be grass, and grass would be stored in /usr/local/grass by default.
The only problem I can think of is gmake5 since gmake is also the
command for GNU make. But this is solved with a simple name change.

A good argument for this change is our recent hassle we had with wish
and trying to determine whether a wish8.* command was installed. The
final solution was to simply search for wish with no version numbers
since most installations will have wish linked to the appropriate
command. Once the version numbers were gone, life became much easier.
Also, the fewer places we have references to the version number, the
easier it is to change the code when the version changes. It will also
clean up existing code by eliminating $VERSION variables. Therefore, I
propose we remove the version numbers from directory names and
filenames. What do people think?

Probably this is a good proposal. Only we have to avoid confusion with
grass4.x.

While I'm at it I will make one more proposal. Throughout the code and
documentation, the .grassrc5 file is almost always referred to as the
"gisrc file". Does anyone object to changing the name from .grassrc to
.gisrc? Of course, this change will be for 5.1.

Mhhh, why not keeping the program's name within the filename?

Regards

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 Justin,

Justin Hickey wrote:

Hello all

Andreas Lange wrote:
> I would not recommend to remove the .tcltkgrass file, as it will
> remove all user configuration (fonts, window sizes, open windows/x
> drivers). This is not the usual behaviour of any application i know.

I agree.

> If we do radical changes on the .tcltkgrass format/internals, we
> should set up a new filename (e. g. .tcltkgrass5 ).

Unfortunately, I would advise against this. I would suggest that writing
a conversion script is a better way to handle this. All it requires is a
tcltkgrass version as the first line of .tcltkgrass and a small script
to make any necessary changes. Then when the tcltkgrass module is
compiled, it checks for a .tcltkgrass file, checks the version, then
performs the proper substitutions to create an up to date file. At least
this method seems to be used in other programs I've used.

OK, a conversion script would be even better. But at this time i can not
see why we should change the .tcltkgrass - format at all. Except from
the new directory for the html-files nothing changed until now.

While I'm at it I will make one more proposal. Throughout the code and
documentation, the .grassrc5 file is almost always referred to as the
"gisrc file". Does anyone object to changing the name from .grassrc to
.gisrc? Of course, this change will be for 5.1.

The .grassrc file is from grass4.x, whilst the .grassrc5 is from grass5.
So changing from .grassrc5 to .grassrc would interfere with grass4.3. I
have a grass4.3 setup (including a partly working xgrass) installed.
But changing to .gisrc would be ok, although i like to have the name of
the application in the name of the rc-file. But as always that is
nothing fundamental.

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'

6

Hi Markus, and Andreas

Markus Neteler wrote:

On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 01:33:29PM +0700, Justin Hickey wrote:
> Therefore, I
> propose we remove the version numbers from directory names and
> filenames. What do people think?

Probably this is a good proposal. Only we have to avoid confusion with
grass4.x.

> While I'm at it I will make one more proposal. Throughout the code
> and documentation, the .grassrc5 file is almost always referred to
> as the "gisrc file". Does anyone object to changing the name from
> .grassrc to .gisrc? Of course, this change will be for 5.1.

Markus Neteler wrote:

Mhhh, why not keeping the program's name within the filename?

Andreas Lange wrote:

The .grassrc file is from grass4.x, whilst the .grassrc5 is from
grass5.
So changing from .grassrc5 to .grassrc would interfere with grass4.3.
I have a grass4.3 setup (including a partly working xgrass) installed.
But changing to .gisrc would be ok, although i like to have the name
of the application in the name of the rc-file. But as always that is
nothing fundamental.

OK, having the filename be .grassrc is fine and makes more sense. I
guess I was brainwashed after seeing it called gisrc so much in the
initialization stuff. :slight_smile:

As for removing the version number, the conflict with grass4.3 was the
reason I suggested we leave it for 5.1. I assumed that once we released
Grass 5 stable, that most (if not all) users would switch to grass 5.
Then for grass 5.1, the conflict wouldn't exist. Or do you see people
still using both versions after Grass 5.1?

--
Sincerely,

Jazzman (a.k.a. Justin Hickey) e-mail: jhickey@hpcc.nectec.or.th
High Performance Computing Center
National Electronics and Computer Technology Center (NECTEC)
Bangkok, Thailand

People who think they know everything are very irritating to those
of us who do. ---Anonymous

Jazz and Trek Rule!!!

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