Bernard's problem was related with using non-file layers in the modeler. It was a very easy fix, so please, everyone that's using SEXTANTE, share your problems so we can work on them and make the software more stable. :-)
Thanks in advance! 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl <[email protected]>: > Hi all, > > just want to inform you that Victor was able to solve my two problems. > Number 1 (CRS missmatch) was kinda my fault (or let's say the fault of a > former QGIS version where my project originally was created in: QGIS did > compare proj4 definition and picked the first CRS the definition of the > layer matched. As EPSG:31464 and EPSG:31468 have the same proj4 definition > but the first is deprecated it was chosen, although my layer is defined as > EPSG:31468 in geometry_columns) > Number 2 (no PostGIS suppport) was fixed in master > > > Bernhard > > Am 17.04.2013 09:24, schrieb Victor Olaya: >> >> Bernhard >> >> >> I am sorry to hear about your bad experience. Could you detail a bit >> more about what you are doing (algorithms you are running, etc)?. >> PostGIS layers should work without problems, but I have recently fixed >> a problem with PostGIS when using SAGA algorithms, so there might be >> other issues like that. >> >> If you want, you can send me your layers and model, so I can have a >> look and try to find out what is happening >> >> Many thanks for your collaboration (and patience) >> >> Victor >> >> >> 2013/4/17 Bernhard Ströbl<[email protected]>: >>> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> for a course I am about to give tomorrow I played a bit with SEXTANTE, >>> although I am going to teach geoprocessing with fTools (we are using QGIS >>> 1.8). It was my first go with SEXTANTE and I was about to show what it >>> will >>> offer in the future. Therefore I built a small model with three input >>> layers >>> a buffer and two overlay operations. I did not succeed in running the >>> model >>> so I tried in current master. >>> As it currently is SEXTANTE is not operable for me (or I am doing it >>> wrong): >>> First message is "Layers do not all use the same CRS...." although they >>> definitely do and the same EPSG-code is noted in square brackets behind >>> each >>> layer name!? Second I get an "Error executing algorithm..." it seems as >>> SEXTANTE cannot use PostGIS layers as input (when I save them as shape >>> files >>> the model runs perfectly), this is a big limitation as my institution >>> stores >>> almost everything in PostGIS. (SEXTANTE should not offer PostGIS layers >>> to >>> choose as input layers then). >>> >>> Well, this was a very disappointing experience because additionally QGIS >>> was >>> frozen two or three times opening or closing the model. I do not want to >>> complain, all I want is to ask for keeping fTools as they are until >>> SEXTANTE >>> can _really_ replace them in all aspects. Then we should remove the >>> vector >>> menue completely because I agree that finding the tool you are looking >>> for >>> is a lot easier in SEXTANTE. >>> >>> my 2 cents >>> >>> Bernhard >>> >>> Am 17.04.2013 07:42, schrieb Anita Graser: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Apr 17, 2013 at 3:19 AM, Mathieu Pellerin<[email protected] >>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>>> >>>> There might be a way to make most people happy here. >>>> >>>> I find the vector menu a nice ui shortcut for useful functions. If >>>> sextante relevant functions are at par (or better), couldn't the >>>> vector menu items stay, which would please many, and when clicked >>>> triggers sextante's function dialogue? Victor? Same thing could >>>> happen with vector menu too. Sextante's analysis toolbar is super >>>> useful but might be a throwback for some if vector / raster menu >>>> functions disappear. >>>> >>>> On human resource (coders and testers) and maintenance angles, >>>> keeping to mechanism to do same thing is an obvious waste. >>>> >>>> I see. So you'd suggest to keep only Sextante code (where duplicates >>>> exist!) but provide shortcuts from the menu? I'd +1 that. >>>> I've been testing a variety of functions in the menus and in Sextante >>>> over the last days and there are always some broken ones. Neither >>>> "package" is without major bugs today. >>>> We need to get it together for 2.0 and that's easier if we can focus on >>>> one. >>>> >>>> Best wishes, >>>> Anita >>>> >>> >>> >>> __________ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus >>> signature >>> database 8235 (20130416) __________ >>> >>> The message was checked by ESET Mail Security. >>> http://www.eset.com >>> >>> >>> > > > __________ Information from ESET Mail Security, version of virus signature > database 8236 (20130417) __________ > > > The message was checked by ESET Mail Security. > http://www.eset.com > > > _______________________________________________ > Qgis-developer mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer _______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
