No idea how it happened; I may have done the bugfix 31 (don't remember,
didn't check), and it is correct; not sure how bugfix.all got wedged, but
stuff happens... (not me, at least this time ;-))
Regards - Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Williamson" <mjw.sdsc.edu>
To: "AMBER Developers Mailing List" <amber-developers.ambermd.org>
Sent: Monday, April 12, 2010 6:23 PM
Subject: [AMBER-Developers] Amber10 Cuda compile failure
> Robert Duke wrote:
>> Well, don't know if someone has dinked up the source but I use gbl_ as a
>> "global" prefix, not glb_, which is at least what shows up below...
>> Regards - Bob Duke
>
> Weird... looking more closely at this, there seems to be a discrepancy
> between the encompassing bugfix.all patch and the specific bugfix.31
> patch:
>
> wget http://ambermd.org/bugfixes/10.0/bugfix.31
> wget http://ambermd.org/bugfixes/10.0/bugfix.all
>
> [15:16][bunny:2.09][mjw:woo]$ grep "natex(:)" *
> bugfix.31:+ gbl_natex(:) = 0
> bugfix.all:+ glb_natex(:) = 0
>
> Hence apply bugfix.all will actually break the build. I'm not sure how
> this happened?
>
> regards,
>
> Mark
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Mon Apr 12 2010 - 16:00:02 PDT
