This reinforces why we should have CI testing somewhere, preferably a
site that has access to lots of different compilers (Rutgers, Utah,
SDSC?). There are a lot of open source solutions for this out there
(e.g. buildbot, jenkins, etc). With Amber getting more and more
complex it seems necessary to have some automated checks in place.
Maybe something to chat about at the developer's meeting?
-Dan
On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:17 AM, David A Case <david.case.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 12, 2016, Hai Nguyen wrote:
>
>> > Failure: building 'mdgx.mdgx' extension
>
>> You catch me. I have never used icc (since I can not test it on travis).
>> May be I just exclude pymdgx build if using icc.
>
> For now, I've just removed pymdgx from the default build on the master branch
> at git.ambermd.org. We need to test this on more compilers before
> re-instating it. Testers can use github, or can do this:
>
> cd $AMBERHOME/AmberTools/src; make pymdgx
>
> ...dac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
--
-------------------------
Daniel R. Roe
Laboratory of Computational Biology
National Institutes of Health, NHLBI
5635 Fishers Ln, Rm T900
Rockville MD, 20852
https://www.lobos.nih.gov/lcb
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Dec 13 2016 - 07:30:02 PST
