On 24 Jul 2015, at 17:44, Erik Schnetter <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Ian Hinder <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 24 Jul 2015, at 17:04, Ian Hinder <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On 24 Jul 2015, at 16:59, Ian Hinder <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 24 Jul 2015, at 14:13, Erik Schnetter <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> I just pushed all the changes related to the McLachlan-rewrite merge. >>>> Apart from the McLachlan Kranc scripts and the respective generated code, >>>> there are a few thorns that needed to have test results updated. >>>> >>>> I see zero test failures with these changes on Bethe, Blue Waters, Carver, >>>> Datura, Edison, Hopper, Mike, Nvidia (a Perimeter workstation), Philip, >>>> Queen Bee, Shelob, and Stampede. >>> >>> Hi Erik, >>> >>> It looks like there are some issues with backward compatibility. I get >>> this error: >>> >>> WARNING[L2,P0] (Cactus): ParameterSetKeyword: Unable to set keyword >>> 'ML_BSSN::my_rhs_boundary_condition', new value 'static' is not in any >>> active range >>> WARNING[L1,P0] (Cactus): Major error in parameter file >>> '/lustre/datura/ianhin/simulations/einsteintoolkit/rewrite_ML_BSSN_bench_o4/output-0000/ML_BSSN_bench.par' >>> line 30: Range error setting parameter >>> 'ML_BSSN::my_rhs_boundary_condition' to 'static' >> >> Also, any output parameters referring to the old variables are now invalid; >> e.g. phi has been renamed phiW. Given this, it looks like old parameter >> files will very likely all have to be modified for the new version. > > Hi Erik, > > Something is wrong with the merge: the merge commit should have two parents, > but it only has one. > > https://bitbucket.org/einsteintoolkit/mclachlan/commits/all > > It looks like the "merge" is just a set of changes on the master branch. > > I merged the master branch into the rewrite branch, and the result of this > then back into the master. The former was non-trivial because of other > changes that happened to the master in the mean time, including regenerating > code, so I introduced a temporary branch "integrate-rewrite" for this. I > didn't look at the parent structures of the commits. > > I now see that integrate-rewrite doesn't have rewrite as parent. Very > strange. I only used SourceTree, and only used standard mechanisms (merging, > branching, committing). (summarising IM conversation with Erik) It looks like some functionality from master was lost in the "merge". e.g. the ability to run the tests on any number of processes. This suggests to me that other changes may also be missing. -- Ian Hinder http://members.aei.mpg.de/ianhin
_______________________________________________ Users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.einsteintoolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/users
