[GRASS5] Re: [bug #3709] (grass) d.m - commands output pollutes the Grass terminal

[Michael Barton]

Maciek

If you think it is better then to reopen this bug number for a different
issue, I guess that is your call. It just seemed to me that we solved the
first issue. Now that it's solved, another issue has become apparent. This
is often the case. I just want to make sure that the appropriate people take
a look at this. It's not d.m per se, but any commands (or possibly d.rast).
You'd get the same result if you did this from the command line.

Michael


______________________________
Michael Barton, Professor of Anthropology
School of Human Evolution and Social Change
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ  85287-2402
USA

voice: 480-965-6262; fax: 480-965-7671
www: http://www.public.asu.edu/~cmbarton


> From: Maciek Sieczka via RT <grass-bugs at intevation.de>
> Reply-To: Maciek Sieczka via RT <grass-bugs at intevation.de>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2005 22:19:10 +0200 (CEST)
> Cc: <grass5 at grass.itc.it>, <Michael.Barton at asu.edu>
> Subject: [bug #3709] (grass) d.m - commands output pollutes the Grass terminal
> 
> Michael wrote:
> 
>> These are two COMPLETELY UNRELATED issues
> 
> 
> 
> These are two very related issues IMO. Grass terminal is still polluted, and
> 
> the pollution is coming from the d.m commands.
> 
> 
> 
> I absolutely agree that you did a large most of the work needed to stop CLI
> 
> being polluted by the d.m, you did all you can and you did it very good. I
> 
> hope you don't have the impression I neglect your effort. That's not my
> 
> intention. I like your d.m enhacement and kudo to your (continous) effort.
> 
> 
> 
> I see however the point is you can't do much more about the remaining issue.
> 
> Thus, if you don't mind, I change the owner back to Mr. Nobody and we have to
> 
> wait for some volunteer to continue your work. Let me know if mind it, off RT
> 
> please to keep the thread possibly clean. I have just added garbage enough ;).
> 
> 
> 
> The other reason I reopened this report instead of creating a new one is that
> 
> I was told by Hamish on grassdevel list not to do so if not necesssary, so we
> 
> could trace all the bug's history easily. I also believe we don't have to
> 
> change the report's title as it stil reflects the issue's nature.
> 
> 
> 
> Maciek
> 
> -------------------------------------------- Managed by Request Tracker