> During last days I discussed with few guys and I got to conclusion that
> maybe it will be easier to check that bug on ppc64 as it exists there as
> well and hardware is available.
That would be great. I'd be happy to check this — it seems simply like a
numerical rounding issue.
Thanks,
-Geoff
W dniu 04.07.2014 o 17:34, Marcin Juszkiewicz pisze:
> W dniu 03.07.2014 22:09, Geoffrey Hutchison pisze:
>> This is really tough to do. Is there any way for me to get access to
>> this machine.. so I can try some patches and more easily debug the
>> issue?
>
> Hardware availability is still a pro
On Fri, 2014-07-04 at 17:34 +0200, Marcin Juszkiewicz wrote:
> W dniu 03.07.2014 22:09, Geoffrey Hutchison pisze:
> > This is really tough to do. Is there any way for me to get access to
> > this machine.. so I can try some patches and more easily debug the
> > issue?
>
> Hardware availability is
W dniu 03.07.2014 22:09, Geoffrey Hutchison pisze:
> This is really tough to do. Is there any way for me to get access to
> this machine.. so I can try some patches and more easily debug the
> issue?
Hardware availability is still a problem. There is software emulation
which can be used.
I am goi
This is really tough to do. Is there any way for me to get access to this
machine.. so I can try some patches and more easily debug the issue?
Otherwise, going back and forth is going to be slow.
Thanks,
-Geoff
--
Open s
W dniu 01.07.2014 20:49, Geoffrey Hutchison pisze:
> OK, give this a try.
test 1
Start 1: rotor_Test
1: Test command: /builddir/build/BUILD/openbabel-2.3.2/bin/test_rotor
1: Test timeout computed to be: 1500
1: /builddir/build/BUILD/openbabel-2.3.2/test/rotortest.cpp:123:
IsNear(RAD_TO_DEG *
OK, give this a try.
-Geoff
rotor.patch
Description: Binary data
--
Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse
Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition
Quic
W dniu 30.06.2014 17:04, Geoffrey Hutchison pisze:
> I wrote back to you through the bug reporter on 5/16 to ask which
> test was failing. I *still* don't know which test is failing from
> your messages. Yes, there's some numerical noise, but I don't know
> *why* unless I know what part of rotor te
I wrote back to you through the bug reporter on 5/16 to ask which test was
failing. I *still* don't know which test is failing from your messages. Yes,
there's some numerical noise, but I don't know *why* unless I know what part of
rotor test is giving you the error.
Can you please use this pat
