Edmund Swylan wrote > ES> I have taken another step back and tried winGRASS 6.4.4 Command Line. > ... > ES> Don't the differences let reduce significantly the set of suspect > .dlls? > MN> Did you try this DLL tool? > MN> https://grasswiki.osgeo.org/wiki/GRASS_Debugging#DLL_dependencies > > I had not tried it. Now I have. To little effect. The dependencies are too > numerous. I have tried to see what makes the v.info of winGRASS 6.4.4 > fare worse than the r.info. Taking into consideration what the relevant > .bats do to PATH, I do not see what module might be missed by v.info but > not by r.info (EFSADU.dll, e.g., would be missed by both.). The > observation > is not much use though. In the process I seem to have discovered a > repetition > in the PATH, a zlib1.dll - probably a copy of zlib_osgeo.dll, and (in > 7.2.1) > competing libintl-8.dlls
re winGRASS 6.4.4, what I can say, the grass 6.x-line isn't maintained actively anymore. Thus, testing should be done with the 7.2.x line. the dll-issues looks like a mismatch and mixing of dlls and their dependencies in %PATH% variable. AFAICT starting from scratch may be an option. ----- best regards Helmut -- View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/g-list-1073741701-cntnd-tp5331698p5331889.html Sent from the Grass - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
