I am using Linux - the executable is simply the Lammps-daily executable that
the doc page suggests for Linux-Ubuntu users. The LAMMPS version is 12 Aug
2013, but I have applied the patch, and then ran the simulation (meaning
that this is not an old restart file).
I regret wasting your time.
don't regret. *do* something about it. but it is still impossible to
figure out what you are doing (or not):
according to your description you have to have at *least* two
different versions with different dates. the current version is 11
Nov 2013, so your august version *cannot* have the update, unless you
patched *and* recompiled the executable.
also, the only *canonical* LAMMPS versions are the source tar archives
from the LAMMPS home page. everything else is made available through
volunteers on a best effort basis.
the matter of the fact is that the current sources and executables
built from them *do* work correctly.
axel.
Axel,
Can you explain to me why when I download the LAMMPS tarball today or yesterday, the version downloaded is still Aug 2013? I am downloading it from the LAMMPS download page. I was making the wrong assumption that redownloading the tarball and redownloading the executable lammps-daily, that it should update my system. I realize now that I was wrong since the LAMMPS version that is still running is the one from August.
Ben
Axel,
Can you explain to me why when I download the LAMMPS tarball today or
yesterday, the version downloaded is still Aug 2013? I am downloading it
i don't know what you are downloading, but the version i am download
*right now* is clearly the 11Nov2013 version.
[[email protected]... Downloads]$ tar -tzvvf lammps.tar.gz.crdownload | head
drwxr-xr-x sjplimp/sjplimp 0 2013-11-08 22:05 lammps-11Nov13/
drwxr-xr-x sjplimp/sjplimp 0 2013-11-08 22:04 lammps-11Nov13/examples/
drwxr-xr-x sjplimp/sjplimp 0 2013-11-08 22:04 lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 349774 2013-02-15 22:00
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/log.tad.1.18Feb13.linux.3
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 5561 2013-02-15 22:00
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/log.tad.18Feb13.linux.3
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 653 2011-01-05 00:35
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/Si.sw
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 238403 2013-02-15 22:00
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/log.tad.neb.18Feb13.linux.3
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 349808 2013-02-15 22:00
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/log.tad.2.18Feb13.linux.3
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 127 2011-01-05 18:25
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/README
-rw-r--r-- sjplimp/sjplimp 2758 2012-01-12 20:03
lammps-11Nov13/examples/tad/in.tad
from the LAMMPS download page. I was making the wrong assumption that
redownloading the tarball and redownloading the executable lammps-daily,
that it should update my system. I realize now that I was wrong since the
LAMMPS version that is still running is the one from August.
perhaps you need to clean up re-organize your directories?
axel.
I completely deleted LAMMPS off my system, redownloaded the tarball and executable, lammps-daily. I do indeed see that I get the new November folder. But then when I run a simulation with the most recently downloaded lammps-daily.
Below, you can see the lammps folder (which I did not rename - want to clarify) and the first line that is read after running simulation.
bjc@…1531…:~/Downloads/lammps-11Nov13/examples/flow$ lammps-daily < in.flow.couette
LAMMPS (12 Aug 2013)
I completely deleted LAMMPS off my system, redownloaded the tarball and
executable, lammps-daily. I do indeed see that I get the new November
folder. But then when I run a simulation with the most recently downloaded
lammps-daily.
so you have new sources and an old executable.
what is so difficult to grasp about this?
how should downloading the sources update the executable?
Benjamin,
as you generally have nothing against sources, I'd suggest you to remove your lammps-daily executable at all and build it from source. It is not that complicated and is well described in the manual. Then you would know exactly what you have.
In case of problems with building lammps, some linux textbook may be useful, too.
Oleg.
11.11.13, 21:54, "Benjamin Cowen" <[email protected]...>":