Le samedi 18 décembre 2010 14:31:21, christian.muel...@nvoe.at a écrit : > Some last comment about the test case, the current source checks > > test_gdal_retile_2() > > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 35 > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 35 > > If I run this on a Linux Intel 32 bit configuration, it has to be > > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 283 > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 122 > > Doing the same on a Linux AMD 64 Bit configuration, the values should be > > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 283 > ds.GetRasterBand(4).Checksum() != 126 > > It seems that the cecksum is dependent on the platform. Is this > desirable ? Could this cause some headaches later ?
Yes, this is a bit annoying. I guess this is related to some compiler difference that impacts numerical precision with the bilinear resampling. What is your OS and compiler versions ? Do you compile in debug or optimized mode ? Do you use your script against GDAL trunk, or do you use it against GDAL 1.7 ? 35 works for me on Ubuntu 10.04 64bits, and it also works on all Windows builds of Tamas (http://vbkto.dyndns.org/sdk/) that test 7 combinations of 32/64 bit and MSVC 1310, 1400, 1500 and 1600. > > Cheers > Christian > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program. _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev