Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Roger Bivand via gdal-dev
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024, Even Rouault wrote: By the way the logic in CPL_area is slightly incorrect. It assumes that if getDimension() == 2  and the type is not wkbMultiSurface or wkbMultiPolygon, then you can cast to OGRSurface* Actually this is incorrect if you have a GeometryCollection with a

Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Even Rouault via gdal-dev
Roer, I'm afraid I can't make much sense of https://github.com/r-spatial/sf/issues/2466 and the linked reports. (I've never used R). Anyway to reproduce that in a more unitary way using the C or Python GDAL API ? Or at least having stack traces of where this segfaults ? There was indeed a r

[gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Roger Bivand via gdal-dev
I've listed four R packages depending on R package sf which show errors in checks with 3.10.0 rc1 and rc2, but which are clean with 3.9.3, tested on Fedora 40 standard GCC (both 3.9.3 and 3.10.0), GDAL built locally from source. The list is an sf github issue: https://github.com/r-spatial/sf/is

Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Even Rouault via gdal-dev
should it? In https://github.com/holans/ST-COS/issues/2 there is a chunk from a backtrace in gdb from CPL_area to OGRGeometryCollection::get_GeodesicLength, which CPL_area didn't call itself. This is fishy. As you use the C++ API, I assume you've rebuilt the sf package against the GDAL 3

Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Even Rouault via gdal-dev
By the way the logic in CPL_area is slightly incorrect. It assumes that if getDimension() == 2  and the type is not wkbMultiSurface or wkbMultiPolygon, then you can cast to OGRSurface* Actually this is incorrect if you have a GeometryCollection with a Polygon (and potentially points, lines). g

Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Roger Bivand via gdal-dev
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024, Even Rouault wrote: should it? In https://github.com/holans/ST-COS/issues/2 there is a chunk from a backtrace in gdb from CPL_area to OGRGeometryCollection::get_GeodesicLength, which CPL_area didn't call itself. This is fishy. As you use the C++ API, I assume you'v

Re: [gdal-dev] GDAL 3.10.0 rc2 available (was Re: GDAL 3.10.0 release candidate is available)

2024-10-31 Thread Roger Bivand via gdal-dev
On Thu, 31 Oct 2024, Even Rouault wrote: Roer, I'm afraid I can't make much sense of https://github.com/r-spatial/sf/issues/2466 and the linked reports. (I've never used R). Anyway to reproduce that in a more unitary way using the C or Python GDAL API ? Or at least having stack traces of wh

[gdal-dev] Slide for OSGeo AGM 2024

2024-10-31 Thread Even Rouault via gdal-dev
Hi, we are asked to prepare presentation slide(s) for the OSGeo Annual General Meeting (AGM) during FOSS4G on Friday, December 6 2024 at 20:30h UTC (https://2024.foss4g.org/en/schedule/). I've just done one at https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1GF2SDBXfEvd3WwvJCVa7ssfLtXnj08w8qF-PUpqwNT