Non-existent mapset fixed in r60749. Multiple mapsets is not too much, but do we need it? Also, if we implement multiple mapsets, it would be better semantically to change "mapset=.." to "mapset=*" for all mapsets in the current location. Martin, do you mind if I change mapset=.. to mapset=*?
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Vaclav Petras <wenzesl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 3:43 AM, Huidae Cho <gras...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I tested g.mlist with the attached script. I started from test_g_list.py >> and replaced g.list with g.mlist -p and g.list -f with g.mlist -f. g. >> mlist passed the test, which means g.list == g.mlist -p & g.list -f == g. >> mlist -f. >> > > More tests needed. g.mlist does not complain about not existing mapset: > > $ g.mlist pattern="lsat*" type=rast mapset=xxxxxx > [no output] > $ echo $? > 0 > > By the way, is multiple for mapset a planned feature? Or it is too much? > Pattern for mapset seems too much for sure. >
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list grass-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
