AMBER Archive (2006)
Subject: Re: AMBER: Installation of Amber8 on Fedora Core 5. .
From: David A. Case (case_at_scripps.edu)
Date: Fri Jun 02 2006 - 14:27:59 CDT
On Thu, Jun 01, 2006, Don.Bashford_at_stjude.org wrote:
> Having said all that, your particular compiler errors look to me like
> a semi-bug in the LEaP code. ShellP.h, etc. are supposed to be
> *private* header files within the X11 implementation. User code is
> just supposed to use Shell.h (without the "P"). I wonder if the code
> would compile if you simply changed the include file names.
Thanks for pointing this out; it's a piece of X11 I was not familiar with.
Unfortunately, it does not work to just change ShellP.h to Shell.h, etc. in
our existing code base.
I can only say that this code was written two decades ago, much of the X part
by non-Amber people (trying to rely as little as possible on any X extensions,
and going back to relase 3 of X, as I remember.) In spite of problems like
the ones pointed out above, the code continues to work (as far as we know)
on all existing X11 implementations.
I haven't seen any X-implementation that has Shell.h but not ShellP.h, and
I suspect that the original poster simply did not have the proper X11
development libraries installed (or that they were not being found).
We believe that we *have* finally all of the 64-bit problems (at least enough
that we don't know of any problems with xleap on 64-bit machines). These
changes are available in Amber 9 and as bugfix.60 for Amber 8. But Amber 8
still requires some hand-tweaking of a configuration file to find the correct
X11 libraries on most 64-bit OSes. For people who can get access to both
32-bit and 64-bit machines, the easiest path (for Amber 8) is often to just
create a 32-bit executable, and copy it over to the 64-bit machines (as
several recent posts have pointed out.)
Finally, I will say that LEaP is being completely rewritten (by Wei Zhang)
in a more modern idiom. This, of course, will probably have its own
portability problems :-( But it also means that, unless we have definite
evidence that calling ShellP directly is really the problem, the LEaP sources
probably won't get changed.
The AMBER Mail Reflector
To post, send mail to amber_at_scripps.edu
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amber" to majordomo_at_scripps.edu