Re: [AMBER-Developers] final (!?!) release candidate for Amber11

From: Gustavo Seabra <>
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:39:42 -0300

Testing on Ubuntu 9.10, with gnu compilers v4.4.1,

only AmberTools installed, serial, I get:

make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/seabra/local/amber/amber11/AmberTools/test'
314 file comparisons passed
0 file comparisons failed
4 tests experienced errors
Test log file saved as logs/test_at_serial/2010-04-16_12-18-14.log
No test diffs to save!

The tests that experienced errors are:
cd ./rism1d/spc && Run.spc
/bin/sh: Run.spc: not found
make[1]: [test.rism1d] Error 127 (ignored)
cd ./rism1d/spc && Run.spc-nacl
/bin/sh: Run.spc-nacl: not found
make[1]: [test.rism1d] Error 127 (ignored)
cd ./rism1d/tip3p && Run.tip3p
/bin/sh: Run.tip3p: not found
make[1]: [test.rism1d] Error 127 (ignored)
cd ./rism1d/tip3p && Run.tip3p-nacl
/bin/sh: Run.tip3p-nacl: not found
make[1]: [test.rism1d] Error 127 (ignored)

Gustavo Seabra
Professor Adjunto
Departamento de Química Fundamental
Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
Fone: +55-81-2126-7417

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 5:11 PM, David A. Case <> wrote:
> Hi everyone:
> I've put a new RC up in the usual place:
> I'm sure there will be some changes before release, but I hope this is last
> one that needs to be tested.
> There *are* a number of new test cases (rism1d, pbsa, PIMD), many of which
> were not being run in earlier RC's.  So I will be disappointed but not too
> surprised if new problems show up; I hope the old ones are gone.
> Scott: I think you should place bug 130 on low priority--there is a simple
> workaround for users, even if some test cases fail.
> If you can, please test AmberTools first (before untarring the Amber11 file),
> since that is all that many users will have.
> ...thanks....dac
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list

AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Fri Apr 16 2010 - 09:00:03 PDT
Custom Search