> But maybe a better approach is to ping the reflector and ask users of
it to reply.
agree.
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Scott Brozell <sbrozell.rci.rutgers.edu>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 11:48:09AM -0500, Daniel Roe wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 10:26 PM, David Case <david.case.rutgers.edu>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > 2. Given that Windows10 has a new and functional Linux subsystem, do
> > > we need to continue to support the -cygwin, -wine and -windows
> options?
> >
> > I think I may have been the only person testing on cygwin, and I no
> > longer have time to do this thoroughly. Unless someone else is testing
> > we should probably remove that option. Ditto for the others if no one
> > is testing them.
>
> I have built with cygwin, but my record keeping is not up to
> snuff on it; probably i built amber around the time i tested
> dock 6.7 for release.
>
>
> > > 3. Does anyone use -static?
> >
> > Not certain but it's a fairly standard option for builds to have.
> > However, I'm not sure that it has been tested - Amber does now have a
> > few libraries that go into $AMBERHOME/lib...
>
> The last time i built with static was
> 648 -rw-r--r-- 1 mpl 659106 Dec 14 2015 outrubypgi154static
>
> Historically, static builds have been useful for portability,
> performance, and testing/debugging. However, i doubt that we have
> used static builds in those ways for some years.
>
> In theory, the AMBERBUILDFLAGS hook could be a replacement for static,
> but a glance at configure2 shows that that simple approach will encounter
> problems.
>
> In configure2 there are 4 if-statements amounting to ~30 lines and ~<10
> more
> lines so static is about 1% of its 3862 lines.
>
> I agree that junk should be thrown out, and let's not forget that it
> would still live in the repo, so on balance i'd vote for dumping it.
> But maybe a better approach is to ping the reflector and ask users of
> it to reply.
>
> scott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Tue Feb 07 2017 - 12:00:03 PST
