[gmx-developers] hidden compiler flags in 4.6?

Roland Schulz roland at utk.edu
Fri Feb 8 22:22:55 CET 2013

On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Szilárd Páll <szilard.pall at cbr.su.se> wrote:

>  I was turned off by the tone of the original email. I imagine that has
>> something to do with the low response rate so far. We've all been wrong at
>> some point. Let's
>  I see you criticism and I was indeed a bit pissed in the beginning.
> Sorry for the rather pushy mail.
>  However, I still think that this major change in the build system
> behavior was merged in without much discussion, review, or feedback. The
> same is true for the closing of related bugs - if not both, at least 1040.

You commented on both I8655f93fac60 and 1038 before it was merged in, and
you were supportive of the approach at that time. I'm sorry if you didn't
have enough time then to look at it in detail, but we couldn't have waited
until February, for you to look at it in detail.


>>  Mark
>> --
>> gmx-developers mailing list
>> gmx-developers at gromacs.org
>> http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers
>> Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
>> www interface or send it to gmx-developers-request at gromacs.org.

ORNL/UT Center for Molecular Biophysics cmb.ornl.gov
865-241-1537, ORNL PO BOX 2008 MS6309
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillist.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-developers/attachments/20130208/193ffac1/attachment.html>

More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-developers mailing list