Re: [AMBER-Developers] release plans

From: Daniel Roe <>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:26:55 -0400

Hi Ross,

On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Ross Walker <> wrote:

> A 'lot' of machines do not allow the stack to be set to unlimited by
> non-root users and some not even by root. E.g. on Redhat EL4 AS:

The only reason I used 'unlimited' was to be consistent with the 'unlimit'
command that was there previously. In my experience setting the stack size
to 20408 allows these tests to pass (actual limit could be smaller, I just
haven't tested extensively). So we could instead do a 'limit stacksize
20408' or whatever number works, and then have the check be STACK < 20408
instead of STACK != unlimited. The main purpose was just to have some
checking for OS's where you can't resize the stack (like Cygwin) and prevent
the tests from crashing out. I'll start checking to see what exact size is

So I'm not sure this is a solution. A 'much better' one would be to go into
> the code and work out why it needs such a large stacksize. Typically this
> is
> due to people using automatic arrays (dangerous F90 feature in my opinion)

Making things smaller would be great - however since I'm not very familiar
with the code involved I hesitate to muck around with it. Maybe someone more
familiar with the EVB stuff can comment on that.

Daniel R. Roe
Postdoctoral Associate
SAS - Chemistry & Chemical Biology
610 Taylor Road
Piscataway, NJ   08854
AMBER-Developers mailing list
Received on Mon Apr 19 2010 - 14:30:02 PDT
Custom Search