> > better a less obtrusive and faster module, like e.g. r.info? >
mmm, maybe it' would be harder to actually check that it has produced what was expected (should parse the output, now it just checks for the generated output file) > > FYI, other pages show well. Are they all taken from website, or from the > grass-doc > package? > from website. Maybe docs for that module were removed > I see it takes a raster in input, in fact. > All the best. True :-) anyway, I will check that in case there are modules in that situation.. thanks! _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
