Hi David,
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 10:31:28AM -0500, Borhani, David wrote:
> Hi Clemens,
>
> Thanks for all your tests; the scripts/keywords you used to run LSQKAB
> with these test systems would help to clarify what may be going right
> vs. going wrong.
That was just a simple run with
lsqkab
, as your examples clearly point out!
Dave
P.S. - I'm not sure I understand the problem that Wangsa mentions, but
it may be related to the 3- vs. 4-character atom name match.
> -Original Message-
> From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On
> Behalf
Dear all,
oops - due to some disk/network issues on my side, the final edits of
my email got lost. Sorry for reposting this again (corrected):
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 02:58:31PM -0500, Borhani, David wrote:
> I think the LSQKAB change at Line 291(old)/Line 300(new) DOES introduce
> new and possib
