Hi There,
Thanks Ben for joining forces here.
I see about downgrade, but I remember that when I moved to Snow Leopard, the
current intel compilers at that time (I don't remember which version) was
broken...
I am going to post my first results with Amber and MPI (GNU and Intel).
Cheers,
Alan
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 17:02, case <case.biomaps.rutgers.edu> wrote:
> On Mon, May 03, 2010, Ben Roberts wrote:
>
> > >> Like Alan, I upgraded to 11.1.088, and I'm running OS X 10.6.3. I see
> > >> the same bugs in AmberTools that he did.
> > >
> > To put the cat among the pigeons some more, Amber serial is presenting me
> with problems too:
> >
> > cd gact_ips && ./Run.ipsnve
> > forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred
> >
> > cd gact_ips && ./Run.ips_dfft
> > forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred
> >
> > cd gact_ips && ./Run.ips_vacuum
> > forrtl: severe (174): SIGSEGV, segmentation fault occurred
> >
> > cd newton_raph && ./Run.newton_raph
> > diffing nmd_min.out.save with nmd_min.out
> > possible FAILURE: check nmd_min.out.dif
> > (on inspection, many numerical differences)
>
> Hi Ben:
>
> On the Amber wiki, you reported mostly good results for these tests:
>
> BPR: Mac OS 10.6.3; Intel 11.1.084; MKL; x86_64; OpenMPI 1.4.1; RC 18apr10
>
> Do you know what is different between now and then? I guess it could be
> the small tweak in the compiler, from 084 to 088(?). [It *is* true that my
> Intel compiler tests never went past 11.1.069.]
>
> ...thx...dac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
--
Alan Wilter S. da Silva, D.Sc. - CCPN Research Associate
Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge.
80 Tennis Court Road, Cambridge CB2 1GA, UK.
>>http://www.bio.cam.ac.uk/~awd28<<
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Mon May 03 2010 - 09:00:05 PDT
