On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 08:21:54AM -0500, case wrote:
> No thanks...I don't want to go down that road. (1) We don't have a
> mechanism for releasing binaries of for updating them after bugfixes.
> (2) I don't know how to have a "universal" MPI code linked in, and
> having something that doesn't match the hardware is likely to impact
> performance far more than compiler options. (3) We would need to purchase
> "commercial" compiler licenses. (4) If you look at the number of options
> in Bob's config_data directory, you can see that some very large number of
> executables would be required.
Indeed, providing some binaries might be also like opening up a can of
worms, no good. I think people in Amber community should also be strong
enough to absorb most of the compilation questions and help each other
in the reflector.
> On another subject: Can you folks look at the pg_pgb test case? I get the
> same result on two different platforms, but both disagree with the save
> output.
We have been aware of these pb_* cases since last week and we are working
on it. Thanks for the reminder!
Thanks,
--
Mengjuei Hsieh, Luo Research Group, Molecular Biology & Biochemistry,
University of California Irvine.
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Feb 02 2010 - 12:30:03 PST
