I guess it is the 'which we no longer support' that I am getting at. What
we have on my local system is, in fact, gcc4.1.2, along with Intel
12.0.0. I think we need to support form of old compiler. For me, Intel12
has been that compiler. If we drop support of Intel compilers, then I
think we need to maintain/add support of older gcc (such as 4.1.2). Again,
maybe what I have is too old and I'm OK with the community telling me that
I need to step up and force an upgrade. But many users don't have that
ability very easily.
BTW, Intel12 builds successfully as of this morning. (I do have errors
with python things, which cause make to die, but 2/3 of the exe files get
built and I can manually build some of the others such that pmemd, sander,
leap, etc seem to build OK.) I haven't checked gcc4.1.2 but past
experience says that will not be successful at all.
Thanks,
Brent
On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 10:29 AM, Daniel Roe <daniel.r.roe.gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 5:42 AM, David A Case <david.case.rutgers.edu>
> wrote:
> > I suspect that we (and our users) get relatively little benefit from all
> the
> > work that goes into supporting the Intel and PGI compilers, especially
> the
> > former, which has a different set of bugs in every release.
>
> Actually, Intel compilers are the default at many HPC sites (stampede,
> comet, CHPC . U. Utah, etc).
>
> > It would be nice if some kind soul with some free time could run a pmemd
> > benchmark (say jac) comparing Intel vs gnu5 on a somewhat modern chip.
> > Also, is cpptraj time-constrained enough to warrant the extra
> optimizations
> > that might come from a proprietary compiler? Do we know anything about
> clang
> > vs gnu for cpptraj?
>
> What's this mythical "free time"?
>
> In all seriousness, I'll try to run something like this today. I have
> access to Gnu 5.3.1 and Intel 14 (old I know) on my local machine that
> has a core i7-2600; not outstanding but not too terrible.
>
> -Dan
>
> >
> > I'm willing to be persuaded: almost all my simulations are on GPUs now,
> where
> > there is little need for proprietary compilers.
> >
> > ...dac
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > AMBER-Developers mailing list
> > AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
>
>
> --
> -------------------------
> Daniel R. Roe, PhD
> Department of Medicinal Chemistry
> University of Utah
> 30 South 2000 East, Room 307
> Salt Lake City, UT 84112-5820
> http://home.chpc.utah.edu/~cheatham/
> (801) 587-9652
> (801) 585-6208 (Fax)
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
--
_______________________________________________
Brent P. Krueger.....................phone: 616 395 7629
Professor.................................fax: 616 395 7118
Hope College..........................Schaap Hall 2120
Department of Chemistry
Holland, MI 49423
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Thu Mar 10 2016 - 08:00:08 PST
