On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Jeffrey Ollie <j...@ocjtech.us> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Dave Hansen <d...@sr71.net> wrote: >> On Thu, 2011-10-13 at 09:48 -0500, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: >>> Also, it looks like the Oct 9th files >>> are truncated as the 4000MB file is only 2.1G (usually they are around >>> 3G). >> >> It says 3GB for me at the moment. >> >> [ ]4000MB-lon_-164.66_to_156.18.2011-09-30.gmapsupp.img13-Oct-2011 15:38 >> 3.1G [ ] >> >> I wonder if it was being rebuilt somehow while you were looking at it. > > Yes, those are the Sep 30th files... The truncated ones appear to be > the Oct 9th files: > > 4000MB-lon_-164.66_to_157.02.2011-10-09.gmapsupp.img 10-Oct-2011 > 19:50 2.3G
More generally the Oct 9th files (at least if the 1000MB -85.69 to +157.02 file is anything to judge by) seem to be missing a lot of ways, suggesting some sort of problem with the overall data that was segmented in that run. Chris -- Chris Lawrence <lordsu...@gmail.com> Website: http://www.cnlawrence.com/ _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list Talk-us@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
