[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS -+- Reporter: andbal | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major

Re: [GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS -+- Reporter: andbal | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: 7.0.4 Component: Python |Version:

Re: [GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2618: v.category option=transfer does not copy multiple cat values

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2618: v.category option=transfer does not copy multiple cat values -+- Reporter: ulf | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: closed Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.0.4 Component: Vector |Version: 7.0.0

[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2913: i.segment.hierarchical: why is there a mandatory output option

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2913: i.segment.hierarchical: why is there a mandatory output option ---+- Reporter: mlennert | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: normal

[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2914: i.segment.hierarchical: the outputs_prefix option should not require formatting string

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2914: i.segment.hierarchical: the outputs_prefix option should not require formatting string -+- Reporter: mlennert | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect |

Re: [GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2914: i.segment.hierarchical: the outputs_prefix option should not require formatting string

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2914: i.segment.hierarchical: the outputs_prefix option should not require formatting string -+- Reporter: mlennert| Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: normal | Miles

Re: [GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2912: raster_what() not compliant with localised version of GRASS -+- Reporter: andbal | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority: major | Milestone: 7.0.4 Component: Python |Version:

[GRASS-dev] Paris Code Sprint Agenda

2016-02-11 Thread Luca Delucchi
Hi devs, I started, a really simple, page [0] for the GRASS GIS Agenda at Paris Code Sprint, please the other devs joining the event could add their purpose for the sprint. [0] https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Paris_Code_Sprint_2016_Agenda -- ciao Luca http://gis.cri.fmach.it/delucchi/ www.luc

Re: [GRASS-dev] Paris Code Sprint Agenda

2016-02-11 Thread massimo di stefano
I added few notes on the git repository, it's just a quick and dirt writing … I’ll work on a better description later next week. thanks, Massimo > On Feb 11, 2016, at 9:58 AM, Luca Delucchi wrote: > > Hi devs, > > I started, a really simple, page [0] for the GRASS GIS Agenda at Paris > Code

[GRASS-dev] [GRASS GIS] #2915: i.segment.hierarchical: print statements should be replaced by messages

2016-02-11 Thread GRASS GIS
#2915: i.segment.hierarchical: print statements should be replaced by messages -+- Reporter: mlennert | Owner: grass-dev@… Type: defect | Status: new Priority:

[GRASS-dev] r.fill.dir segfaults on large maps.

2016-02-11 Thread Isaac Ullah
Hi all, I'm using r.fill.dir on a very large landscape, and noticed that it will segfault if the number of cells is > 150,000,000. Is this a known limitation of r.fill.dir, or a bug? Happy to report the bug if so. I'm using latest nightly of GRASS 7 on Ubuntu 14.04. -- Isaac I Ullah, Ph.D. A

Re: [GRASS-dev] r.fill.dir segfaults on large maps.

2016-02-11 Thread Anna Petrášová
On Thu, Feb 11, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Isaac Ullah wrote: > Hi all, > >I'm using r.fill.dir on a very large landscape, and noticed that it > will segfault if the number of cells is > 150,000,000. Is this a known > limitation of r.fill.dir, or a bug? Happy to report the bug if so. I'm > using latest

Re: [GRASS-dev] r.fill.dir segfaults on large maps.

2016-02-11 Thread Isaac Ullah
Hmmm... I restarted GRASS and I can no longer replicate the problem. It was a very specific cut-off at 150 million cells though. I guess it's a non-issue since it works now. I monitored the memory usage, and even at 400 million cells, it was only using 52 MB. Strange why it was breaking before! Tha