I would have not ever going to get this =s
On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Miika Turkia <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 22, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Davide DB <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> In my endless tries to import SmartTrak logs I found a bug but I don't >> know if it's a problem of DL or Subsurface 4.1. >> >> Imported a .slg file containing 379 dives to diving log 5.0. >> Exported fromm DL in xml format (as Subsurface manual suggest) >> Exported from DL in uddf format as well. >> >> xml import: dives seems ok except for some of them with incorrect >> profiles. >> uddf import: everything ok. >> >> The DL exported xml file contains correct depth points but somehow the >> profile is completely different (see screenshot). Dive stats indicate >> correct values > > > It seems that Diving Log has recorded the maximum depth to be a bit less > than the maximum sample depth. And the Imperial vs. metric unit test was a > simple comparison, if maximum sample depth is greater than the value of > maximum depth, then it was considered to be imperial units. Attached patch > doubles the maximum depth value of this comparison, so the difference must > be quite significant for this test to fail in the future. > > miika > > _______________________________________________ > subsurface mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface > _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.hohndel.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
