Hi Marcin,

Thanks! I forgot the recursive flag for diff. I thought it was odd that there weren't that many differences between the 2 source trees.

We can update the tests when we make the move to 1.56.

Also, I'm assuming that we want to just use the standard 1.56 tarball. 

--
Billy K. Poon
Research Scientist, Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
1 Cyclotron Road, M/S 33R0345
Berkeley, CA 94720
Tel: (510) 486-5709
Fax: (510) 486-5909

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Marcin Wojdyr <wojdyr@gmail.com> wrote:
On 5 April 2017 at 23:37, Billy Poon <bkpoon@lbl.gov> wrote:

> It looks like the errors are related to random number generation. For a
> given seed, would the sequence of numbers change when Boost is changed? I
> did a diff between Boost 1.56 and the current Boost and could not see any
> changes that immediately stood out as being related to random numbers.
>
> Are these tests failing for others as well?
>

Hi Billy,
perhaps it's this change in boost/random/normal_distribution.hpp:
https://github.com/boostorg/random/commit/f0ec97ba36c05ef00f2d29dcf66094e3f4abdcde
_______________________________________________
cctbxbb mailing list
cctbxbb@phenix-online.org
http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb