On Fri, Aug 14, 2009, Ross Walker wrote:
> ARRRGGHHHH!!! I knew I was not going mad!!! The CVS tree is all links to the
> dcqtp directory so when I updated it in AMBER 11 it went and modified
> everything in AMBER10 as well. Hence why the AMBER 10 tree no longer
> represents the release version of the code.
Just so everyone is clear here: the amber10/src/dcqtp and amber11/src/dcqtp
trees basically point to cvsroot/dcqtp. This was done because the Florida
people wanted to have their own CVS tree, although I don't think they ever
actually adopted the one we created(?).
>
> I am assuming that just deleting the amber10/src/dcqtp directory in the tree
> and replacing it with ../../dcqtp will work fine? Does anybody know if this
> is likely to cause problems?
I seriously doubt that this will work. I'm not sure what you mean by
"../../dcqtp" in this case. Further, although *most* of the files in
cvsroot/amber10/src/dcqtp are links to cvsroot/amber10/dcqtp, not all of them
are...we have some files of our own.
If you want the amber10 CVS tree to match the release, I think you will need
to do something like this:
a. move cvsroot/amber10/src/dcqtp to dcqtp~ (so you can undo things later)
b. grab the amber10.tgz from the web site and untar the dcqtp directory into
a working amber10 directory. The do a recursive "cvs add" on the newly
un-tarred dcqtp directory.
But perhaps a more relevant question is this: what are you really trying to
do? Why do you care whether or not the Amber10 tree "represents the release
version of the code"? Does something break if you just check out version
"v_10" from either the amber11 or the amber10 CVS? In this case, it looks(?)
like the only problem is that the "head" of the amber10 CVS tree doesn't match
the release...the "v_10" tag should, however.
> I will also remove all the links for AMBER11 and put
> the dcqtp directory directly in the AMBER11 tree
Please don't do this, at least until taking lots of real deep breaths. Is
something broken in the amber11 tree (related to dcqtp) as well? Fiddle with
cvsroot/amber10 if you must, but let's all take a close look at that looks
like after your surgery before modifying cvsroot/amber11.
...dac
> From: Seetin, Matthew [mailto:Matthew_Seetin.URMC.Rochester.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 1:44 PM
> To: Ross Walker
> Subject: RE: qmmm_div in amber10
>
> Thanks for the feedback. It looks like the -nosanderidc option will fix my
> issue in the short term, but I'm still not able to compile without that flag
> set. To verify that I wasn't crazy, I did a completely clean checkout of
> AMBER 10 from cvs, and I redownloaded all the latest bug fixes and applied
> them all. If I try to compile without the -nosanderidc flag, the build will
> halt with the following error:
The "problem" here is with the (reasonable, but actually incorrect) assumption
that a checkout from amber10 CVS followed by bugfixes will get you the Amber10
code. If you want Amber10 for testing, or to appy patches against, get the
tar file from the web site, apply the bugfixes to that, and then proceed.
[OR: checkout from amber10 CVS, but use the "v_10" tag, not the head of the
tree.]
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Wed Aug 19 2009 - 22:37:54 PDT
