Selon Kyle Shannon <[email protected]>: > It seems to me the result of the command: > > gdalwarp -t_srs EPSG:4326 -overwrite mosaic.tif mosaic.tif > > would never be desired, and maybe not allowed? Is there any case where this > makes any sense?
As I said in my previous email, I can't see any case where it would be valid. With -overwrite, it is suicide. Without -overwrite, it is useless at best. So in my opinion, this should not be allowed > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Even Rouault > Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2011 4:55 AM > To: Hermann Peifer > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: [gdal-dev] Re: Strange behavior of gdalwarp with -overwrite option > > Selon Hermann Peifer <[email protected]>: > > > On 08/11/2011 20:28, Even Rouault wrote: > > > > > > gdalwarp something.tif something.tif -t_srs EPSG:XXXX makes no sense... > > > > Indeed: typing 'something.tif' twice should not be necessary. But the > > following could theoretically make sense (in analogy to GNU sed's > > -i/--in-place switch (which creates a temporary file and later > > *overwrites* the original file): > > > > gdalwarp -i something.tif -t_srs EPSG:XXXX > > > > However, as one hardly get things right in the first run: there is a > > good chance that the result is not what you want -- and the original > > file is gone :-(. At least this happens to me whenever I use sed's -i > > switch. So I wouldn't see a need for introducing this behaviour in > > GDAL command line utilitiies. > > There's no risk to see that in the case of gdalwarp. GDAL has no > infrastructure to do in place reprojection and it would be really challenging > to do that without a temporary file. > > > > > Hermann > > > > > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
