Hi,
On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 08:17:25AM -0700, Jason Swails wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 26, 2010 at 12:20 AM, Scott Brozell
> <sbrozell.rci.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> >
> > As for Amber10 ( http://ambermd.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Amber10test ),
> > we have a wiki page for testing summaries:
> > http://ambermd.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Amber11test
> > Please contribute your results.
> >
> > This page is a place to record the ''good'' (or almost good) results of the Amber11 test suite. If you get a compiler/OS/hardware combination that mostly passes all the test, please post the test details here. That way, we will not only have the ''negative''
> > results (on bugzilla), but also the ''positive'' results of tests recorded.
>
> Certainly a good place to have such results posted. One suggestion I
> may add is to add some more details about the operating system used.
> For example, there is a very large difference between Mac OS X 10.5
> and Mac OS X 10.6, and these would be important distinctions in my
> opinion. While this is definitely more pronounced for Mac OS than it
> is for Linux variants, I do think that would be useful to know as well
> (i.e. Ubuntu 9.04/9.11 vs. Red Hat/CentOS, etc.) since each Linux has
> its own slightly unique character.
Yes, one should list pertinent platform details.
The stranger your platform, the more bleeding edge, the worse your
record keeping, etc. then the more required.
As a template:
configure arguments; libraries; OS; hardware; machine id
The amber 10 page has lots of examples of details.
thanks,
Scott
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Fri Mar 26 2010 - 11:30:03 PDT
