On 9/3/2010, at 1:47 p.m., Ross Walker wrote:
> 10.1.018 also works.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: amber-developers-bounces.ambermd.org [mailto:amber-developers-
>> bounces.ambermd.org] On Behalf Of case
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 10:03 AM
>> To: AMBER Developers Mailing List
>> Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] PMEMD missing type?
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 09, 2010, case wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> cpp -traditional -P -DBINTRAJ -DDIRFRC_EFS -DDIRFRC_COMTRANS
>>>>> -DDIRFRC_NOVEC -DFFTLOADBAL_2PROC -DPUBFFT pme_setup.fpp
>> pme_setup.f90
>>>>> ifort -fast -c pme_setup.f90
>>>>> pme_setup.f90(417): error #6404: This name does not have a type,
>> and
>>>>> must
>>>>> have an explicit type. [NATOM]
>>>>> do n = 1, natom
>>>>> ------------^
>>>>>
>>>
>>> What Intel compiler are you using?
>>
>> One quick addtional point, then I have meetings all day:
>>
>> For me, it appears that ifort 10.1.025 works, but 11.1.069 fails.
>>
>> ...dac
Sorry for the delay. I tried a fresh tree, and ran into problems connected with the gcc-4.5 compilers. It seems that every so often the version coming down from MacPorts gets borked.
However, it seems that others have beaten me to it. Is the general feeling that the Intel compilers are just stricter than they were (and the code is doing something non-standard), or rather that the compilers are themselves broken?
For the time being, I've commented pmemd out in the Makefile. As an aside, pmemd compiled OK under Intel Mac 11.1.076 when it was configured separately. I'm not sure what difference, if any, that makes. Is it possible now to test pmemd using the old build style?
Ben
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Mar 09 2010 - 12:30:03 PST
