- mkgmap-dev - The mkgmap lists

Re: [mkgmap-dev] Digest Vol 174, Issue 4 - Garmin Edge 530
by john510185 08 Jan '23

08 Jan '23

I recently bought one of these, but had to send it back because it absolutely refused to pair via bluetooth with my phone and laptop. Other than that, it was impressive. I added OpenFietsMap maps to the existing Garmin one without much difficulty. It's a nice size, navigation worked well, and the display was bright and clear. However, I subsequently discovered that whilst you can send routes from PC/phone to the unit, you can't navigate on the move to personal favourites/waypoints you may have saved. For that you need the Edge 830, which is quite a bit more expensive. I'll probably get one, but I'm not so keen on touchscreen for these devices (prefer the tactile feel of buttons). Hope this helps. On Sunday, 8 January 2023 at 12:09:11 GMT, mkgmap-dev-request(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk <mkgmap-dev-request(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk> wrote: Send mkgmap-dev mailing list submissions to mkgmap-dev(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to mkgmap-dev-request(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk You can reach the person managing the list at mkgmap-dev-owner(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of mkgmap-dev digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Slightly Offtopic - Cycling Computers (brad) I can comment on the Karoo since I have one. I would not recommend it. You definitely can't use mkgmap to build maps. The maps that it comes with are really poor for mtn biking. You can't create a route unless you have internet access. You can't load a gpx track as an overlay on the map. On 1/2/23 16:45, News wrote: > > I'm in the market for a new cycling computer so thought I'd ask on > here for opinions (good or bad) on the following.... > > My main interest is navigation. I'm not particularly bothered about > cadence sensors, power outputs etc and so I've come across the > following.... > > Garmin Edge 530 > Can anyone guarantee that maps created with mkgmap currently work on > this device. I discovered the mkgmap project when looking for a source > of free maps for Garmin devices as I think the policy of Garmin to > charge extra for maps on a GPS is insulting. > https://www.garmin.com/en-GB/p/621224 > > Hammerhead Karoo 2 > Pricier option but is well reviewed. I'm guessing proprietary maps but > it claims bi-monthly updates > https://www.uk.hammerhead.io/products/hammerhead-karoo-2 > > Mio Cyclo 215 > Cheapest but I've never heard of them and so I'm wary > https://www.mio.com/en_gb/products/outdoors/cycling-navigation/cyclo-200-se… > > > I've already ruled out Wahoo but if anyone has any other alternatives > or comments I'm willing to listen > > Thanks for reading and for any replies > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk > https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev _______________________________________________ mkgmap-dev mailing list mkgmap-dev(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev

1 0

DEM data from gmapsuppp not showing on BaseCamp
by Carlos Dávila 04 Jan '23

04 Jan '23

Happy New Year to all! One user of my maps has reported that when he loads a gmapsupp with DEM in BaseCamp, it doesn't show shaded relief, while if he loads gmap version of the same map it does. I have confirmed the issue with a couple of maps and also that BaseCamp reads height information from gmapsupp, as it is displayed in the status bar along with coordinates. gmap version of the same maps does show both shaded relief and height info at all zoom levels. My DEM maps are generated with options below, just combining precompiled map data (51*.img) and DEM data (63*.img) tiles. gmapi command: java -ea -Xmx27G -jar mkgmap.jar --dem=hgt/ALOS --dem-poly=polygons/$mapa.poly --overview-dem-dist=128000 --gmapi-minimal${GMAPI_MINIMAL} --show-profiles=1 --road-name-config=${CONFIG} tmp/51${FID}*.img curvas/63${FID}*.img tmp/${ABR}5${FID}.txt gmapsupp command: java -Xmx27G -ea -jar mkgmap.jar --gmapsupp --road-name-config=${CONFIG} --route tmp/51${FID}*.img curvas/63${FID}*.img tmp/${ABR}5${FID}.typ --description="OSM $MAPA DEM" --no-tdbfile I then tried splitting map data with the same areas.list used to generate DEM tiles, so that both groups of tiles share the same bounding box, but it didn't work either. Only if map and DEM data are all compiled in the same run of mkgmap, gmapsupp shows shaded relief in BaseCamp. Does anybody know a way to get shaded relief from gmapsupp when using precompiled tiles?

2 2

Slightly Offtopic - Cycling Computers
by News 03 Jan '23

03 Jan '23

I'm in the market for a new cycling computer so thought I'd ask on here for opinions (good or bad) on the following.... My main interest is navigation. I'm not particularly bothered about cadence sensors, power outputs etc and so I've come across the following.... Garmin Edge 530 Can anyone guarantee that maps created with mkgmap currently work on this device. I discovered the mkgmap project when looking for a source of free maps for Garmin devices as I think the policy of Garmin to charge extra for maps on a GPS is insulting. https://www.garmin.com/en-GB/p/621224 Hammerhead Karoo 2 Pricier option but is well reviewed. I'm guessing proprietary maps but it claims bi-monthly updates https://www.uk.hammerhead.io/products/hammerhead-karoo-2 Mio Cyclo 215 Cheapest but I've never heard of them and so I'm wary https://www.mio.com/en_gb/products/outdoors/cycling-navigation/cyclo-200-se… I've already ruled out Wahoo but if anyone has any other alternatives or comments I'm willing to listen Thanks for reading and for any replies

2 1

Remove accentiuation
by 7770 02 Jan '23

02 Jan '23

Hi and with wishes of a Happy new year. When preparing maps i use the setting --latin1 (same as --code-page=1252) This is good most of the time, since most language specific characters are replaced with plain latin characters. Cyrillic is transliterated to latin. In Ukraininan there is a softening letter (ь), when this is present in a name, it is transliteradet to ' (apostrophe). For example the city Львів becomes L'viv. This in turn makes searches more difficult since one not familar with the language may not know where the accentuation is placed. As a forigner i would not know if it is Lviv or L'viv. Is there some better code page to use to start with (still performing transliteration) or some way to ask mkgmap to remove the apostrophe from the text? Regards Karl

2 1

Remove accentiuation
by 7770 01 Jan '23

01 Jan '23

Hi and with wishes of a Happy new year. When preparing maps i use the setting --latin1 (same as --code-page=1252) This is good most of the time, since most language specific characters are replaced with plain latin characters. Cyrillic is transliterated to latin. In Ukraininan there is a softening letter (ь), when this is present in a name, it is transliteradet to ' (apostrophe). For example the city Львів becomes L'viv. This in turn makes searches more difficult since one not familar with the language may not know where the accentuation is placed. As a forigner i would not know if it is Lviv or L'viv. Is there some better code page to use to start with (still performing transliteration) or some way to ask mkgmap to remove the apostrophe from the text? Regards Karl

1 0

Re: [mkgmap-dev] Deathloop on splitting file created by splitter if using argentina.poly --polygon-file
by Felix Hartmann 18 Dec '22

18 Dec '22

Hi Gerd, well it got stuck for at least 30 hours on a Ryzen 5 3600 - so not sure it ever finds a solution. Is it ever helpful to use a polygon for resplitting tiles? I guess for resplitting the polygon is not helpful anyhow so I just resplit without polygon-file in general. Thanks for looking into it. Felix On Sun, 18 Dec 2022 at 21:47, Gerd Petermann < gpetermann_muenchen(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > Hi Felix, > > I am not yet sure what goes wrong. Maybe it is not an endless loop but a > very slow one which tries again and again similar > bad splits. > > Problem is the polygon which contains large, almost empty areas. I think > you should never use it when you re-split. > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: Felix Hartmann <extremecarver(a)gmail.com> > Gesendet: Sonntag, 18. Dezember 2022 12:14 > An: Gerd Petermann > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Deathloop on splitting file created by splitter > if using argentina.poly --polygon-file > > Well hope you can find the problem, i think it's the second time I have > this kind of problem but cannot remember right now on which other country > it happened. > > On Sun, 18 Dec 2022, 17:36 Gerd Petermann <gpetermann_muenchen(a)hotmail.com > <mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com>> wrote: > Hi Felix, > > seems I used version 651 instead of 652. I can reproduce your results now. > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: Felix Hartmann <extremecarver(a)gmail.com<mailto: > extremecarver(a)gmail.com>> > Gesendet: Samstag, 17. Dezember 2022 15:48 > An: gpetermann_muenchen(a)hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com > > > Betreff: Re: [mkgmap-dev] Deathloop on splitting file created by splitter > if using argentina.poly --polygon-file > > I used the most up to date argentia.poly - That*s very strange. For me > it*s getting stuck on calculating areas forever (using next to 0 CPU and > RAM). > I'm using oracle java and not openjdk however - can that make a > difference? I just updated to oracle Java SDK 17.05 from 16.01. but it > stays the same. > > Here is the start of my output: > D:\openmtbmap\maps>start /belownormal /b /wait java -Xmx4000m -jar > C:\openmtbmap\splitter.jar --max-nodes=1400000 --max-threads=11 > --search-limit=1000000 --output=o5m > --geonames-file=E:\openmtbmap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip > --polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly > --description=argentina --mapid=64700017 "64700010.o5m" > Splitter version 652 compiled 2022-06-17T08:25:16+0100 > boundary-tags=use-exclude-list > cache= > description=argentina > geonames-file=E:\openmtbmap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip > handle-element-version=remove > ignore-osm-bounds=false > keep-complete=true > mapid=64700017 > max-areas=2048 > max-nodes=1400000 > max-threads=11 > mixed=false > no-trim=false > num-tiles= > output=o5m > output-dir= > overlap=auto > polygon-desc-file= > polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly > precomp-sea= > problem-file= > problem-report= > resolution=13 > route-rel-values= > search-limit=1000000 > split-file= > status-freq=120 > stop-after=dist > wanted-admin-level=5 > write-kml= > Elapsed time: 0s Memory: Current 1024MB (4MB used, 1020MB free) Max > 4000MB > Time started: Sat Dec 17 15:45:59 CET 2022 > Warning: Bounding polygon is complex. Splitter might not be able to fit > all tiles into the polygon! > Map is being split for resolution 13: > - area boundaries are aligned to 0x800 map units (0.0439453125 degrees) > - areas are multiples of 0x800 map units wide and high > Processing 64700010.o5m > Bounding box -59.897460900000006 -35.1123046 -56.733398400000006 -34.453125 > Fill-densities-map pass took 203 ms > Exact map coverage read from input file(s) is > (-35.1123046875,-59.8974609375) to (-34.453125,-56.7333984375) > Exact map coverage after applying bounding box of polygon-file is > (-35.1123046875,-59.8974609375) to (-34.453125,-56.7333984375) > Rounded map coverage is (-35.1123046875,-59.8974609375) to > (-34.453125,-56.7333984375) > Splitting nodes into areas containing a maximum of 1 400 000 nodes each... > splitting none > Highest node count in a single grid element is 98 584 > Highest node count in a single grid element within the bounding polygon is > 98 584 > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.83203125) to > (-34.4970703125,-57.744140625) with 3 972 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S2 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 3972 (0 %), cache size 0 > S2 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 3972 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 3972 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.744140625) to (-34.541015625,-57.65625) > with 1 869 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S4 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1869 (0 %), cache size 0 > S4 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1869 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1869 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.65625) to > (-34.5849609375,-57.6123046875) with 1 891 nodes, goal is to get near 1 > tiles > S6 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1891 (0 %), cache size 0 > S6 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1891 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1891 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.6123046875) to > (-34.62890625,-57.5244140625) with 5 871 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S8 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 5871 (0 %), cache size 0 > S8 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 5871 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 5871 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.5244140625) to > (-34.6728515625,-57.4365234375) with 5 595 nodes, goal is to get near 1 > tiles > S10 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 5595 (0 %), cache size 0 > S10 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 5595 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 5595 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.4365234375) to > (-34.716796875,-57.3486328125) with 892 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S12 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 892 (0 %), cache size 0 > S12 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 892 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 892 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.3486328125) to > (-34.7607421875,-57.2607421875) with 7 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S14 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 7 (0 %), cache size 0 > S14 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 7 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 7 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.2607421875) to > (-34.8046875,-57.1728515625) with 9 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S16 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 9 (0 %), cache size 0 > S16 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 9 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 9 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.1728515625) to > (-34.8486328125,-57.12890625) with 9 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S18 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 9 (0 %), cache size 0 > S18 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 9 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 9 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S20 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S20 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S22 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S22 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S24 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S24 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.041015625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.041015625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S26 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S26 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S28 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S28 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S30 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S30 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.041015625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.041015625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S32 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S32 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S34 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S34 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S36 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S36 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.041015625) to > (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) with 1 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S38 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 1 (0 %), cache size 0 > S38 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 1 (0 %) > Solution is nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit 1000000: > 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 1 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.0244140625,-56.953125) to (-34.98046875,-56.865234375) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.953125) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.98046875,-57.12890625) to (-34.9365234375,-56.953125) > with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.865234375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S40 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S40 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S42 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S42 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S44 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S44 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S46 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S46 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-56.77734375) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S48 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S48 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.12890625) to > (-35.068359375,-56.7333984375) with 6 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S50 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 6 (0 %), cache size 0 > S50 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 6 (0 %) > Solution is not nice. Can't find a better solution with search-limit > 1000000: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is 6 (0 %) > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-34.9365234375,-57.12890625) to > (-34.892578125,-57.041015625) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-56.865234375) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.068359375,-57.12890625) to > (-35.0244140625,-56.77734375) with 0 nodes, goal is to get near 0 tiles > Splitting tile (-35.1123046875,-57.1728515625) to > (-34.8486328125,-57.12890625) with 9 nodes, goal is to get near 1 tiles > S52 FULL: step 1 goal: 1 tiles, now: 1 tile(s). The smallest node count is > 9 (0 %), cache size 0 > S52 FULL goal was 1 tiles, solver finished with : 1 tile(s). The smallest > node count is 9 (0 %) > > On Sat, 17 Dec 2022 at 16:20, Gerd Petermann < > gpetermann_muenchen(a)hotmail.com<mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com > ><mailto:gpetermann_muenchen@hotmail.com<mailto: > gpetermann_muenchen(a)hotmail.com>>> wrote: > Hi Felix, > > cannot reproduce the loop here. Maybe the content of the current > argentina.poly differs from yours? > > BTW: I see much better runtime with just java -jar -Xmx4G > d:\splitter\dist\splitter.jar > instead of java -XX:+AggressiveHeap -Xms5000M -Xmx40000m -jar > d:\splitter\dist\splitter.jar using openjdk version "11.0.15" 2022-04-19 > > Gerd > > ________________________________________ > Von: mkgmap-dev <mkgmap-dev-bounces(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto: > mkgmap-dev-bounces(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk><mailto: > mkgmap-dev-bounces(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto: > mkgmap-dev-bounces(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk>>> im Auftrag von Felix Hartmann < > extremecarver(a)gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com><mailto: > extremecarver(a)gmail.com<mailto:extremecarver@gmail.com>>> > Gesendet: Samstag, 17. Dezember 2022 07:30 > An: Development list for mkgmap > Betreff: [mkgmap-dev] Deathloop on splitting file created by splitter if > using argentina.poly --polygon-file > > Hi, > > I tried resplitting a file that was too big for the map creation using > splitter - and if I use the boundary file splitter.jar is getting stuck > finding a solution (until killed). > > Command: > start /belownormal /b /wait java -XX:+AggressiveHeap -Xms5000M -Xmx40000m > -jar C:\openmtbmap\splitter.jar --max-nodes=1400000 --output=o5m > --geonames-file=E:\openmtbmap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip > --polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly > --description=argentina --mapid=64700017 "64700010.o5m" > > If leaving out the polygon-file it works without problems to resplit it > again. > > Command used to create the file that fails to be splitted again: > C:\openmtbmap\splitter.jar > "--precomp-sea=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\sea.zip" > --polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly > --max-nodes=2800000 --max-threads=11 --search-limit=1000000 --output=o5m > "--keep-complete" > --route-rel-values=mtb,bicycle,foot,hiking,road,mountainbike,ferry,shuttle_train,subway,train,tram,river,canal,ski,piste,walking > --max-areas=4000 > --geonames-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip > --description=argentina --mapid=64700000 > E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.o5m 1>NUL > > However I also uploaded the file for debug: > https://openmtbmap.org/64700010.o5m > > I don't think there is a problem in general with splitting a file splitted > by spliter.jar again using smaller max-nodes and using polygon-file option. > Something is special here that it fails (happened already one week ago with > a 7 day older geofabrik extract) > > -- > Felix Hartman - Outdoormaps LTD - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org > > _______________________________________________ > mkgmap-dev mailing list > mkgmap-dev(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk > ><mailto:mkgmap-dev@lists.mkgmap.org.uk<mailto: > mkgmap-dev(a)lists.mkgmap.org.uk>> > https://www.mkgmap.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/mkgmap-dev > > > -- > Felix Hartman - Outdoormaps LTD - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org > > -- Felix Hartman - Outdoormaps LTD - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org

1 0

Deathloop on splitting file created by splitter if using argentina.poly --polygon-file
by Felix Hartmann 17 Dec '22

17 Dec '22

Hi, I tried resplitting a file that was too big for the map creation using splitter - and if I use the boundary file splitter.jar is getting stuck finding a solution (until killed). Command: start /belownormal /b /wait java -XX:+AggressiveHeap -Xms5000M -Xmx40000m -jar C:\openmtbmap\splitter.jar --max-nodes=1400000 --output=o5m --geonames-file=E:\openmtbmap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip --polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly --description=argentina --mapid=64700017 "64700010.o5m" If leaving out the polygon-file it works without problems to resplit it again. Command used to create the file that fails to be splitted again: C:\openmtbmap\splitter.jar "--precomp-sea=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\sea.zip" --polygon-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.poly --max-nodes=2800000 --max-threads=11 --search-limit=1000000 --output=o5m "--keep-complete" --route-rel-values=mtb,bicycle,foot,hiking,road,mountainbike,ferry,shuttle_train,subway,train,tram,river,canal,ski,piste,walking --max-areas=4000 --geonames-file=E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\cities5000.zip --description=argentina --mapid=64700000 E:\OpenMTBMap\osmpbf_geofabrik\argentina.o5m 1>NUL However I also uploaded the file for debug: https://openmtbmap.org/64700010.o5m I don't think there is a problem in general with splitting a file splitted by spliter.jar again using smaller max-nodes and using polygon-file option. Something is special here that it fails (happened already one week ago with a 7 day older geofabrik extract) -- Felix Hartman - Outdoormaps LTD - Openmtbmap.org & VeloMap.org

2 1

multipolygon relation, water
by brad 05 Dec '22

05 Dec '22

This water relation doesn't show up on my map. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/370015 I added this to my relations file type=multipolygon & natural=water { apply { set natural=water; set name='${name}'; } } But still doesn't work. I have a bunch of natural=water lines in my polygons file for various sizes & other natural=water ways work just fine. Any help appreciated. thx Brad

2 2

Why does the default typ not render cycleways?
by ael 28 Nov '22

28 Nov '22

Just a quick question: when I compile with default style and typ, cycleways are not rendered. I need to use, say, mapnik.txt to see them. So far as my very limited understanding reaches, the default style has highway=cycleway [0x11 road_class=0 road_speed=1 resolution 23] garmin type 0x11. So far so good (and mapnik picks that up). But the default typ seems to ignore 0x11, although I cannot find that specification just now. Have I missed something? Why don't the defaults render things so significant as cycleways? This seems to have been the case for at least a year. ael

3 4

Question on routing difference
by jan meisters 26 Nov '22

26 Nov '22

Hi all, I´m using an altered copy of the OFM style and therefore sometimes compare the results. One routing difference I found I was able to lead back, but the cause I don´t understand at all. My test-route should prefer the small residential „Altengabengäßchen“ over the primary „Viktoriastrasse“. Latest OFM does, my version not since I removed {add bicycle=yes} from this line: highway=path & surface ~ '(paved|asphalt|sett|concrete|paving_stones|paving_stones:30)' & access!=no & access!=private & vehicle!=no { set highway=pedestrian; add bicycle=yes; add motorcar=yes; } But unfortunately there is no path or pedestrian in the test-route, nor is it an option to use one. Anyone has an idea how this path>pedestrian rule could affect routing on residential/primary? Same happens when I replay the change with the original OFM. Up-to-date osm.pbf, route from BC and screenshots are here: https://files.mkgmap.org.uk/download/556/test_route.zip Thanks Jan

7 19