*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the *** *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
I know this is not the XPLOR newsgroup, but I also know that most of you are crystallographers and are familiar with XPLOR, so I thought I'd simply ask here without joining yet another listserve. Sorry if this bothers anybody. Anyway, you may all remember that you helped me considerably a few weeks back, when deciding to throw away my old SGI's and get a Linux system. I did just that (though I didn't throw them out yet), and have an AMD64 system up and running with Fedora Core 5 (I had it around, I may try something else later but it was convenient). I tried to download/install xplor several times with no luck. I simply could not get xplor or cns to install and work (cns would compile but it didn't work, meaning compiler errors). I followed the cns web site info and reinstalled libraries as it stated but apparently I am still doing something wrong. So, I did a google search and found a version of xplor that is pre-compiled and works fine (xplor-NIH). I downloaded this and it's working fine (so what's the question). The question is this: I took old data that had been through xplor before. using the exact same input scripts, topology files, etc..., I ran them again with the "new" xplor. It is very fast, but the striking thing is that my R-factors are 5-10% lower (both R and R-free) than they were on the other machine. The number of reflections is identical, and everything seems to be the same, but the R-factors. What does this mean??? How can I validate this to ensure that this new xplor (or my old one for that matter) is giving me numbers I can trust??? Thanks Dave Roberts [EMAIL PROTECTED]
