[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
19990423: strange problem with IMGDISP and stretch tables
- Subject: 19990423: strange problem with IMGDISP and stretch tables
- Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 18:13:30 -0600
>From: weather <address@hidden>
>Organization: NMSU/NSBF
>Keywords: 199904231716.LAA23829 McIDAS IMGDISP SU=
Robert,
>I have found a problem (not a big one, but it confused me for a bit).
>If you try to use one of the two Water Vapor stretch tables,
>H2OTEMP AND H2O, with IMGDISP (SU=...), it will report that it can't
>find them even though they are there. It finds the ET file H2O
>file fine and finds the other stretch tables fine. It occurred
>to me that it probably did not like the numeric in the name, sure enough,
>that was it. If you rename them to WVTEMP.ST and WV.ST, it works
>fine.
Previously I noted that this appeared to be a bug that I would report to
SSEC. Before sending them off a note, I decided to try and duplicate your
findings on my RedHat Linux 5.2 box at home (getting imagery from
a remote ADDE server running on Sun Solais SPARC (Ultra 2) 2.6 through
a 21.6 Kb modem connection (slow but works)). I could not get IMGDISP
to fail. Here is what I ran:
IMGDISP RTIMAGES/GW-WV STA=KDEN MAG=2 EU=IMAGE SU=H2O
Beginning Image Data transfer, bytes= 315312
IMGDISP: loaded frame 1
IMGDISP: done
SF 2
IMGDISP RTIMAGES/GW-WV STA=KDEN MAG=2 EU=IMAGE SU=H2OTEMP
Beginning Image Data transfer, bytes= 315312
IMGDISP: loaded frame 2
IMGDISP: done
SF 3
IMGDISP RTIMAGES/GW-WV STA=KDEN MAG=2 EU=IMAGE SU=H2OTEMP.ST
IMGDISP:
IMGDISP: first SU= argument is too big --> H2OTEMP.ST
IMGDISP: Must be character string of no more than 8 chars.
IMGDISP:
IMGDISP: done
IMGDISP failed, RC=1
IMGDISP RTIMAGES/GW-WV STA=KDEN MAG=2 EU=IMAGE SU=H2O.ST
Beginning Image Data transfer, bytes= 315312
IMGDISP: loaded frame 3
IMGDISP: done
We now have a mystery on our hands: why do stretch tables with numeric
characters in their names fail on your system and not on mine? Can
you let me know which system(s) this failed on for you (e.g. your new
SPARC, the older x86 box, or a Linux platform)? I can't test out
either x86 or SPARC from home (popping a McIDAS session throught a
21.6 connection is just too painful!).
Tom