Hi Nikos I just sort out. the file /PERMANENT/cell_misc/UNIT3753/reclassed_to was very big (2.5g) and it was not be able to be removed with the r.remove.
Thank you Giuseppe On 24 May 2017 at 17:21, Nikos Alexandris <[email protected]> wrote: > * Giuseppe Amatulli <[email protected]> [2017-05-24 14:59:02 > -0400]: > > Hi all, >> I have a strange error when I'm try to remove the mask >> >> GRASS 7.0.2 (loc_river_fill_GLOBE):~ > r.mask -r >> > > Dear Giuseppe, > > Are you bound to 7.0.2? 7.2 is the latest released version. > > Traceback (most recent call last): >> File "/gpfs/apps/hpc.rhel7/Apps/GRASS/7.0.2/grass-7.0.2/scripts/r.mask", >> line 184, in <module> >> main() >> File "/gpfs/apps/hpc.rhel7/Apps/GRASS/7.0.2/grass-7.0.2/scripts/r.mask", >> line 104, in main >> type = 'raster', name = 'MASK') >> File >> "/gpfs/apps/hpc.rhel7/Apps/GRASS/7.0.2/grass-7.0.2/etc/pytho >> n/grass/script/core.py", >> line 394, in run_command >> return handle_errors(returncode, returncode, args, kwargs) >> File >> "/gpfs/apps/hpc.rhel7/Apps/GRASS/7.0.2/grass-7.0.2/etc/pytho >> n/grass/script/core.py", >> line 312, in handle_errors >> returncode=returncode) >> grass.exceptions.CalledModuleError: Module run None ['g.remove', '--q', >> '-f', 'type=raster', 'name=MASK'] ended with error >> Process ended with non-zero return code -11. See errors in the (error) >> output. >> [Raster MASK present] >> > > What does `g.list -m raster` say? > > even if i try to remove >> the MASK directly >> g.remove -f type=raster name=MASK >> or the file associate to it >> g.remove -f type=raster name=UNIT3753 >> I get Segmentation fault >> > > > would you have time to debug this one? See > https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_Debugging. > > As a last resort, did you try to hard-remove manually (as per rm -rf) all > files > related to MASK and UNIT3735 (inside the directories cell, fcell, > cell_misc and > cell_hd)? > > > I try also to r.in.gdal the file again, the file is imported successfully, >> but I still not able to remove the MASK. >> >> In the past I have used the UNIT3753-raster several time without problem >> than one week ago I used to create another data set >> r.patch input="UNIT3753,UNIT4000" output="UNIT3753_4000" >> > > Could be that the UNIT3753 raster is "link" to the UNIT3753_4000 and lock >> any kind of operation associate to it? >> > > Unless I miss something, the answer is no. `r.patch` produces a new and > independent map. > > Nikos > -- Giuseppe Amatulli, Ph.D. Research scientist at Yale School of Forestry & Environmental Studies Yale Center for Research Computing Center for Science and Social Science Information New Haven, 06511 Teaching: http://spatial-ecology.org Work: https://environment.yale.edu/profile/giuseppe-amatulli/
_______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
