<div dir="ltr">Hi,<br><br>later 4.2 gcc versions (4.2.3 and 4.2.4) seem to be OK too. 4.2.0 is broken.<br><br>Intel seems to be OK.<br><br>PGI 7.1 is broken, PGI 7.2 seems OK.<br><br>Pathscale seems to be OK.<br><br>Roland<br>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 1:31 PM, Nicholas Breen <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nbreen@ofb.net">nbreen@ofb.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="Ih2E3d">On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 09:05:48PM -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:<br>
> According to the source code download site:<br>
><br>
> "WARNING: do not use the gcc 4.1.x set of compilers. They are broken. These<br>
> compilers come with recent Linux distrubutions like Fedora 5/6 etc."<br>
><br>
> I can attest that gcc 4.0.1 seems to have generated no problems for me.<br>
> Anything later than that is suspect, as evidenced by strange behavior<br>
> documented on the users list.<br>
<br>
</div>For what it's worth, I've found gcc 4.3 to be substantially more<br>
reliable - it seems to have eliminated the various misoptimization<br>
problems that plagued certain binaries compiled with 4.1.<br>
<font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
Nicholas Breen<br>
<a href="mailto:nbreen@ofb.net">nbreen@ofb.net</a><br>
</font><div><div></div><div class="Wj3C7c">_______________________________________________<br>
gmx-developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gmx-developers@gromacs.org">gmx-developers@gromacs.org</a><br>
<a href="http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers" target="_blank">http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-developers</a><br>
Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the<br>
www interface or send it to <a href="mailto:gmx-developers-request@gromacs.org">gmx-developers-request@gromacs.org</a>.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>ORNL/UT Center for Molecular Biophysics <a href="http://cmb.ornl.gov">cmb.ornl.gov</a><br>
</div>