On Sat, 2008-04-19 at 05:00 +0100, Glynn Clements wrote:
Nikos Alexandris wrote:
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a vector's
history log?
Whenever I create a subset of a map with r.mapcalc, its pre-r.mapcalc
history is gone. Is it not a good idea to keep
Nikos Alexandris wrote:
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a vector's
history log?
Whenever I create a subset of a map with r.mapcalc, its pre-r.mapcalc
history is gone. Is it not a good idea to keep all actions logged?
Isn't there a possibility to
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a vector's
history log?
Whenever I create a subset of a map with r.mapcalc, its pre-r.mapcalc
history is gone. Is it not a good idea to keep all actions logged?
Thank you,
Nikos
___
Nikos Alexandris wrote:
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a
vector's history log?
because the raster code is about 20 years older and hard to change now.
the command line history for raster modules is only widespread in the
last year or two.
Whenever I create a
On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 18:03 -0700, Hamish wrote:
Nikos Alexandris wrote:
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a
vector's history log?
because the raster code is about 20 years older and hard to change now.
the command line history for raster modules is only
Nikos Alexandris wrote:
Why isn't the raster history log (of any raster) similar with a vector's
history log?
Whenever I create a subset of a map with r.mapcalc, its pre-r.mapcalc
history is gone. Is it not a good idea to keep all actions logged?
The problem is that a map created by
