Windows CE port of GDAL - work started

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Windows CE port of GDAL - work started

Mateusz Loskot
Hi,

I'd like to announce that I started to port GDAL/OGR to Windows CE.
Company I work for - Taxus SI Ltd. (www.taxussi.com.pl) - has decided to
move our mapping libraries for Windows and Windows CE to use GDAL/OGR.
We started to work on port of GDAL/OGR to be able to
compile it with eMbedded Visual C++ (evc4) and use it on Windows CE-based
operating systems.
Mainly, I'm involved in this porting project.
There is also my colleague - Krzysztof - from my company
but he will do part-time work on this port, management mainly.

The Roadmap of my work

1.   First, my aim is to compile CPL port library using evc4 compiler and do some tests on Windows CE based devices.
2.   Port OGR part of GDAL to Windows CE with at least Shapelib as data format.
2.1. Write some test application - Shapefile viewer - based on OGR for Windows CE.
3.   Port other useful vector formats of OGR.
4.   Port GDAL with raster formats to Windows CE.

Note:
Point 3 and 4 are planned to future work.
Vector support is now most important for me,
because company I work for needs it in short time (October-November).

As I talk to Frank Warmerdam, next week, or two I will send him my code of OGR port to Windows CE.
Then we do some review and correct my code (online).
After Frank will like my port he move it to the official CVS repositiory.
...and Windows CE port of GDAL/ORG will live together with official version.
That should be helpful to track new changes to GDAL/OGR and add it to the Windows CE port.

My and my company I work for idea is to publish all changes we will release.
Then everyone who is interested in using and/or contributing to the Windows CE port
is strongly welcome.
So, we are doing first step alone, after that it will by available for everyone.

State of the work

Yesterday, I managed to compile CPL from MITAB project using evc4 without any errors, only a few warnings.
OGR in MITAB is cutted-down version, so I decided to start with this one as potentially simplier to work with.
Today, I'm merging my CPL-from-MITAB changes to official CPL version, included in GDAL.
Next week, I'm on a 3-days bussines trip (starting from Wednesday) so,
I have only Monday and Tuesday to work on OGR port.
But I believe that till the end of September I will release Windows CE port and send it to Frank for review.

I'm curious if anyone is interested in GDAL/OGR port for Windows CE.

My casual thoughts

On my huge TODO list I have also to try to compile GDAL/OGR with
Intel(R) C++ Compiler for Windows* CE. I have only evaluation version of this compiler
so if someone has a license and could help me to test my port, please give me a note.

I think I will follow Frank Warmerdam's roadmap and suggestions, as he is a project leader.
My company I work for has no plans to develop our own GDAL/OGR version separated from official source tree.


All suggestions and ideas are welcome!

Best regards

--
Mateusz Łoskot
mateusz at loskot dot net


_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE : Windows CE port of GDAL - work started

Alain Rist
Message
Hi Mateusz,
 
I am VERY interested.
 
How do you intend to deal with the Unicode issues ?
 
cheers,
AR


-----Message d'origine-----
De : [hidden email] [[hidden email]] De la part de Mateusz Loskot
Envoyé : vendredi 16 septembre 2005 10:46
À : [hidden email]
Objet : [Gdal-dev] Windows CE port of GDAL - work started


Hi,

I'd like to announce that I started to port GDAL/OGR to Windows CE.
Company I work for - Taxus SI Ltd. (www.taxussi.com.pl) - has decided to
move our mapping libraries for Windows and Windows CE to use GDAL/OGR.
We started to work on port of GDAL/OGR to be able to
compile it with eMbedded Visual C++ (evc4) and use it on Windows CE-based
operating systems.
Mainly, I'm involved in this porting project.
There is also my colleague - Krzysztof - from my company
but he will do part-time work on this port, management mainly.

The Roadmap of my work

1.   First, my aim is to compile CPL port library using evc4 compiler and do some tests on Windows CE based devices.
2.   Port OGR part of GDAL to Windows CE with at least Shapelib as data format.
2.1. Write some test application - Shapefile viewer - based on OGR for Windows CE.
3.   Port other useful vector formats of OGR.
4.   Port GDAL with raster formats to Windows CE.

Note:
Point 3 and 4 are planned to future work.
Vector support is now most important for me,
because company I work for needs it in short time (October-November).

As I talk to Frank Warmerdam, next week, or two I will send him my code of OGR port to Windows CE.
Then we do some review and correct my code (online).
After Frank will like my port he move it to the official CVS repositiory.
...and Windows CE port of GDAL/ORG will live together with official version.
That should be helpful to track new changes to GDAL/OGR and add it to the Windows CE port.

My and my company I work for idea is to publish all changes we will release.
Then everyone who is interested in using and/or contributing to the Windows CE port
is strongly welcome.
So, we are doing first step alone, after that it will by available for everyone.

State of the work

Yesterday, I managed to compile CPL from MITAB project using evc4 without any errors, only a few warnings.
OGR in MITAB is cutted-down version, so I decided to start with this one as potentially simplier to work with.
Today, I'm merging my CPL-from-MITAB changes to official CPL version, included in GDAL.
Next week, I'm on a 3-days bussines trip (starting from Wednesday) so,
I have only Monday and Tuesday to work on OGR port.
But I believe that till the end of September I will release Windows CE port and send it to Frank for review.

I'm curious if anyone is interested in GDAL/OGR port for Windows CE.

My casual thoughts

On my huge TODO list I have also to try to compile GDAL/OGR with
Intel(R) C++ Compiler for Windows* CE. I have only evaluation version of this compiler
so if someone has a license and could help me to test my port, please give me a note.

I think I will follow Frank Warmerdam's roadmap and suggestions, as he is a project leader.
My company I work for has no plans to develop our own GDAL/OGR version separated from official source tree.


All suggestions and ideas are welcome!

Best regards

--
Mateusz Łoskot
mateusz at loskot dot net


_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev


_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: RE : Windows CE port of GDAL - work started

Mateusz Loskot

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alain Rist [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 11:15 AM
> To: 'Mateusz Loskot'; [hidden email]
> Subject: {Definitely Spam?} RE : [Gdal-dev] Windows CE port of GDAL - work started
>
>
> Hi Mateusz,
>
> I am VERY interested.
>
> How do you intend to deal with the Unicode issues ?
>

Hi Alain,

Yes, Unicode is a problem (or beneficial).
I talked to Frank about how I should solve Unicode problem.
We decided that GDAL/OGR interface shouldn't be changed to Unicode-like interface,
but Unicode will be wrapped inside the library.
Not very clear? I thought so.
Let's take some example.

CPLGetSymbol function from cplgetsymbol.cpp file.
This function calls LoadLibrary from Win32 API.
LoadLibrary is a typedef of LoadLibraryA or LoadLibraryW, depending on that you
are compiling with UNICODE support or not.
For Windows CE you always compile software with UNICODE support.
So, in our example, LoadLibraryW will be called in place of LoadLibrary call.
W - means wide-char version, A - means ANSI character set.
How I handle such CPLGetSymbol function?
Simply, I wrap LoadLibrary call in CPLGetSymbol with #ifdef...#endif and for Windows CE version and
I do ANSI->Unicode conversion (string with library path in our example) then I call LoadLibrary -> LoadLibraryW.

Summary
All ANSI char-based API of GDAL/OGR won't be changed (const char* won't be changed to const wchar_t*).
So, client application will use chars not wide-chars and (what is certainly a problem) has to convert
Unicode strings to char-strings (certainly, not all strings) while passing strings to GDAL/OGR API.

Simple, I follow the same approach as in Shapelib and sqlite for Windows CE.
It seems it works well on Windows CE and there are not many confusions working with such ports.


It is simple and not very genius, so if anyone has better solution, please give me a note.

--
Mateusz Łoskot
mateusz at loskot dot net


_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Imagine overviews option

Garrett Potts
Hello Frank/All:


I was told that you have added imagine overview building both  
creating internal overview and for creating a .rrd file.  I didn't  
see an option string added that could specify either method.  What is  
the generic interface to create either option for imagine output files.

Thank you in advance for any help


Take care

Garrett
_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Windows CE port of GDAL - work started

Frank Warmerdam
In reply to this post by Mateusz Loskot
On 9/16/05, Mateusz Łoskot <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd like to announce that I started to port GDAL/OGR to Windows CE.

Mateusz,

I am quite pleased that you will be doing this work on a wince port.
Is there a simple macro we will always define to know we are on
the wince platform?  I was thinking perhaps that we would
define WIN32 (as we do now on normal windows builds) and the
WINCE macro.  So any special cases for wince could be #ifdef'ed
accordingly.

I will provide CVS commit access but I shall try to produce a
GDAL 1.3.1 release in the next week or so, before we start
committing WinCE related changes.   There are some important
new features and bug fixes I would like to get out before we
potentially destabilize things again.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Frank Warmerdam
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
On 9/16/05, Garrett Potts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello Frank/All:
>
> I was told that you have added imagine overview building both
> creating internal overview and for creating a .rrd file.  I didn't
> see an option string added that could specify either method.  What is
> the generic interface to create either option for imagine output files.

Garrett,

By default now gdaladdo on .img file will create Imagine style
overviews instead of a GDAL .ovr file (TIFF).  By default they are
created in the .img file unless they will be too big in which case
a spill file (.ige) is created.

If you set the HFA_USE_RRD configuration option to YES then
an external .rrd file will be used for the overviews instead of
putting them right in the .img file.  Unfortunately, I did not include
an "options list" in the BuildOverviews() methods in GDAL so there
is no way to pass options like this into the overview building method.
And options passed to the original file creation are not preserved
to the point that overviews are build (which is not part of file creation).

Config values can be set as environment variables, on the command
line with the --config switch, or in C using the CPLSetConfigOption()
function.

eg.

setenv HFA_USE_RRD=YES

or

gdaladdo --config HFA_USE_RRD YES abc.img

or

CPLSetConfigOption( "HFA_USE_RRD", "YES" );
...

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Garrett Potts
Hello FRank:

Thank you for the response.  I'll take a look at the option HFA_USE_RRD

Take care

Garrett
On Sep 16, 2005, at 10:36 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> On 9/16/05, Garrett Potts <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Frank/All:
>>
>> I was told that you have added imagine overview building both
>> creating internal overview and for creating a .rrd file.  I didn't
>> see an option string added that could specify either method.  What is
>> the generic interface to create either option for imagine output  
>> files.
>>
>
> Garrett,
>
> By default now gdaladdo on .img file will create Imagine style
> overviews instead of a GDAL .ovr file (TIFF).  By default they are
> created in the .img file unless they will be too big in which case
> a spill file (.ige) is created.
>
> If you set the HFA_USE_RRD configuration option to YES then
> an external .rrd file will be used for the overviews instead of
> putting them right in the .img file.  Unfortunately, I did not include
> an "options list" in the BuildOverviews() methods in GDAL so there
> is no way to pass options like this into the overview building method.
> And options passed to the original file creation are not preserved
> to the point that overviews are build (which is not part of file  
> creation).
>
> Config values can be set as environment variables, on the command
> line with the --config switch, or in C using the CPLSetConfigOption()
> function.
>
> eg.
>
> setenv HFA_USE_RRD=YES
>
> or
>
> gdaladdo --config HFA_USE_RRD YES abc.img
>
> or
>
> CPLSetConfigOption( "HFA_USE_RRD", "YES" );
> ...
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> +--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,  
> [hidden email]
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for  
> Rent
>

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Imagine overviews option

Chapman, Martin
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
Frank,

Can you add a new method that lets you specify the overview format type
(like void SetPyramidFormat(int nFormatTypeId); or something)?  That
would be really handy. :)

Best regards,
Martin

P.S. GDAL Rules.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank
Warmerdam
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 8:37 AM
To: Garrett Potts
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Gdal-dev] Imagine overviews option


On 9/16/05, Garrett Potts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hello Frank/All:
>
> I was told that you have added imagine overview building both creating

> internal overview and for creating a .rrd file.  I didn't see an
> option string added that could specify either method.  What is the
> generic interface to create either option for imagine output files.

Garrett,

By default now gdaladdo on .img file will create Imagine style overviews
instead of a GDAL .ovr file (TIFF).  By default they are created in the
.img file unless they will be too big in which case a spill file (.ige)
is created.

If you set the HFA_USE_RRD configuration option to YES then
an external .rrd file will be used for the overviews instead of
putting them right in the .img file.  Unfortunately, I did not include
an "options list" in the BuildOverviews() methods in GDAL so there is no
way to pass options like this into the overview building method. And
options passed to the original file creation are not preserved
to the point that overviews are build (which is not part of file
creation).

Config values can be set as environment variables, on the command line
with the --config switch, or in C using the CPLSetConfigOption()
function.

eg.

setenv HFA_USE_RRD=YES

or

gdaladdo --config HFA_USE_RRD YES abc.img

or

CPLSetConfigOption( "HFA_USE_RRD", "YES" );
...

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
---------------------------------------+------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
[hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Frank Warmerdam
On 9/16/05, Chapman, Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank,
>
> Can you add a new method that lets you specify the overview format type
> (like void SetPyramidFormat(int nFormatTypeId); or something)?  That
> would be really handy. :)

Martin,

I gather you are suggesting this be a method on the GDALDataset?  
I am pretty hesitant to add new virtual methods on the GDALDataset
unless I think they are really important to the data / access model.

The CPLSetConfigOption() provides a mechanism to control it, but not
in a dataset specific manner.  Were you wanting to be able to request
particular datasets to use one kind of overviews, and particular others
to use a different kind of overviews?  

I think I might be better off extending the BuildOverview method to
include an options list.  

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Garrett Potts
Hello FRank and others:

Actually it seems if anything were to be added it would be best to  
add it to the XML option string for the hfa dataset???
I am not sure if frank likes this or not but this would give a  
generic way, without changing any current interfaces, of specifying  
writer specific overview dataset creation options.

   <Option name='HFA_USE_RRD' type='boolean' description='Use  
external rrd file for overview building, default NO'/>

Not sure if this is what the create options was intended?  If not  
then maybe some other metadata NAME could be added for the HFA  
specific way of creating an overview?


Take care

Garrett

On Sep 16, 2005, at 12:24 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> On 9/16/05, Chapman, Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Frank,
>>
>> Can you add a new method that lets you specify the overview format  
>> type
>> (like void SetPyramidFormat(int nFormatTypeId); or something)?  That
>> would be really handy. :)
>>
>
> Martin,
>
> I gather you are suggesting this be a method on the GDALDataset?
> I am pretty hesitant to add new virtual methods on the GDALDataset
> unless I think they are really important to the data / access model.
>
> The CPLSetConfigOption() provides a mechanism to control it, but not
> in a dataset specific manner.  Were you wanting to be able to request
> particular datasets to use one kind of overviews, and particular  
> others
> to use a different kind of overviews?
>
> I think I might be better off extending the BuildOverview method to
> include an options list.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> +--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,  
> [hidden email]
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for  
> Rent
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gdal-dev mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Garrett Potts
In reply to this post by Frank Warmerdam
Hello Frank:

>
> The CPLSetConfigOption() provides a mechanism to control it, but not


Just added this to the GDAL plugin and it works great :)


Take care

Garrett

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Frank Warmerdam
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
On 9/16/05, Garrett Potts <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hello FRank and others:
>
> Actually it seems if anything were to be added it would be best to
> add it to the XML option string for the hfa dataset???
> I am not sure if frank likes this or not but this would give a
> generic way, without changing any current interfaces, of specifying
> writer specific overview dataset creation options.
>
>    <Option name='HFA_USE_RRD' type='boolean' description='Use
> external rrd file for overview building, default NO'/>
>
> Not sure if this is what the create options was intended?  If not
> then maybe some other metadata NAME could be added for the HFA
> specific way of creating an overview?

Garrett,

The problem is that creation options are for information needed when
creating the .img file.  But creating overviews is not part of the Create()
or CreateCopy() methods.  It is a separate operation that might be
never be done, might be done later, or might be done in a separate
process run.

If I were to allow this to be passed into the Create() method, then I
would have to figure out somewhere in the .img file to stash this
preference so that I could find it again later when it is time to create
overviews.   That is possible, but it seems ... messy.  And it would not
extend well to other formats where I cannot just add arbitrary data
in the format.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Imagine overviews option

Chapman, Martin
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
Frank,

I don't care about specific datasets using different overview formats.
So, if I understand correctly, I can use the CPLSetConfigOption()
function to swap between pyramid formats?  If that works, then that
would suit my needs.  Is that correct?  Is there any documentation on
how to use the rrd format on the gdal website?

Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of
Frank Warmerdam
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 10:24 AM
To: Chapman, Martin
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Gdal-dev] Imagine overviews option


On 9/16/05, Chapman, Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank,
>
> Can you add a new method that lets you specify the overview format
> type (like void SetPyramidFormat(int nFormatTypeId); or something)?  
> That would be really handy. :)

Martin,

I gather you are suggesting this be a method on the GDALDataset?  
I am pretty hesitant to add new virtual methods on the GDALDataset
unless I think they are really important to the data / access model.

The CPLSetConfigOption() provides a mechanism to control it, but not in
a dataset specific manner.  Were you wanting to be able to request
particular datasets to use one kind of overviews, and particular others
to use a different kind of overviews?  

I think I might be better off extending the BuildOverview method to
include an options list.  

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
---------------------------------------+------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
[hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Frank Warmerdam
On 9/16/05, Chapman, Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank,
>
> I don't care about specific datasets using different overview formats.
> So, if I understand correctly, I can use the CPLSetConfigOption()
> function to swap between pyramid formats?  If that works, then that
> would suit my needs.  Is that correct?  

Martin,

Yes, that is correct.

> Is there any documentation on
> how to use the rrd format on the gdal website?

The HFA_USE_RRD config option is now subtly mentioned near the
bottom of:

 http://www.gdal.org/frmt_hfa.html


--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Garrett Potts
In reply to this post by Frank Warmerdam
Hello FRank:

Understood. Thank you for the information.


Take care

Garrett
On Sep 16, 2005, at 12:57 PM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> On 9/16/05, Garrett Potts <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Hello FRank and others:
>>
>> Actually it seems if anything were to be added it would be best to
>> add it to the XML option string for the hfa dataset???
>> I am not sure if frank likes this or not but this would give a
>> generic way, without changing any current interfaces, of specifying
>> writer specific overview dataset creation options.
>>
>>    <Option name='HFA_USE_RRD' type='boolean' description='Use
>> external rrd file for overview building, default NO'/>
>>
>> Not sure if this is what the create options was intended?  If not
>> then maybe some other metadata NAME could be added for the HFA
>> specific way of creating an overview?
>>
>
> Garrett,
>
> The problem is that creation options are for information needed when
> creating the .img file.  But creating overviews is not part of the  
> Create()
> or CreateCopy() methods.  It is a separate operation that might be
> never be done, might be done later, or might be done in a separate
> process run.
>
> If I were to allow this to be passed into the Create() method, then I
> would have to figure out somewhere in the .img file to stash this
> preference so that I could find it again later when it is time to  
> create
> overviews.   That is possible, but it seems ... messy.  And it  
> would not
> extend well to other formats where I cannot just add arbitrary data
> in the format.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> ---------------------------------------
> +--------------------------------------
> I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,  
> [hidden email]
> light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
> and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for  
> Rent
>

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Ken Boss
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
>>> Frank Warmerdam <[hidden email]> 9/16/2005 11:24:25 AM >>>
>On 9/16/05, Chapman, Martin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Frank,
>>
>> Can you add a new method that lets you specify the overview format type
>> (like void SetPyramidFormat(int nFormatTypeId); or something)?  That
>> would be really handy. :)
>
>Martin,
>
>I gather you are suggesting this be a method on the GDALDataset?  
>I am pretty hesitant to add new virtual methods on the GDALDataset
>unless I think they are really important to the data / access model.
>
>The CPLSetConfigOption() provides a mechanism to control it, but not
>in a dataset specific manner.  Were you wanting to be able to request
>particular datasets to use one kind of overviews, and particular others
>to use a different kind of overviews?  
>
>I think I might be better off extending the BuildOverview method to
>include an options list.  
>

Frank et al--

Erdas Imagine itself supports the creation and use of .rrd files alongside any raster format that Imagine supports.  I think GDAL/Imagine users would benefit from an  overview type selection mechanism that is not tied to a particular raster file format, perhaps by extending the BuildOverviews method as you've suggested.

--Ken Boss
  MN DNR Forestry




_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Imagine overviews option

Frank Warmerdam
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
On 9/16/05, Ken Boss <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank et al--
>
> Erdas Imagine itself supports the creation and use of .rrd files alongside any raster format that Imagine supports.  I think GDAL/Imagine users would benefit from an  overview type selection mechanism that is not tied to a particular raster file format, perhaps by extending the BuildOverviews method as you've suggested.

Ken,

In fact, it seems that Peng feels the same, and is holding my nose
to the grindstone on my long ago promise to supporting reading and
writing Imagine/ArcGIS compatible .aux/.rrd files.  I will now return
to my work on gdaldefaultoverview.cpp to try and handle the
.ovr / .rrd dicotomy gracefully.   This capability *will* be in the
GDAL/OGR 1.3.1 release.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, [hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Imagine overviews option

Chapman, Martin
In reply to this post by Garrett Potts
Frank,

Cool, you are the man.

Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Frank
Warmerdam
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2005 12:46 PM
To: Ken Boss
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Gdal-dev] Imagine overviews option


On 9/16/05, Ken Boss <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frank et al--
>
> Erdas Imagine itself supports the creation and use of .rrd files
> alongside any raster format that Imagine supports.  I think
> GDAL/Imagine users would benefit from an  overview type selection
> mechanism that is not tied to a particular raster file format, perhaps

> by extending the BuildOverviews method as you've suggested.

Ken,

In fact, it seems that Peng feels the same, and is holding my nose to
the grindstone on my long ago promise to supporting reading and writing
Imagine/ArcGIS compatible .aux/.rrd files.  I will now return to my work
on gdaldefaultoverview.cpp to try and handle the
.ovr / .rrd dicotomy gracefully.   This capability *will* be in the
GDAL/OGR 1.3.1 release.

Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------
---------------------------------------+------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam,
[hidden email]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Programmer for Rent

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev

_______________________________________________
Gdal-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.maptools.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev