[Isocops] nightly carnage
fair-play at comcast.net
fair-play at comcast.net
Fri Jun 18 09:05:25 EDT 2010
Geoff,
I am to blame for that. I chose 8 because it was the first digit in the series files that didn't have an existing file and I was afraid that using one of the assigned ones would break something. Guess it didn't work out that way. I see digits 0 - 5 defined in the manual but didn't check far enough to see that the higher ones were also used.
I don't think we want to change a lot for this - I should just change the series number to something that won't cause a problem. I do see that 6 and 7 are currently linked (one of the reasons I thought they might be used). But if it's not a problem to blast one of those I could use one of them.
Ken
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geoffrey B. Crew" <gbc at space.mit.edu>
To: "Nathan Schwadron" <nschwadron at me.com>
Cc: "Ken Fairchild" <fair-play at comcast.net>, isocops at lists.sr.unh.edu
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2010 8:42:54 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [Isocops] nightly carnage
He indeed installed a new ephemeris, the problem is that the nightly
build uses this one.
Unless code has been changed (which I doubt) only orbit series
6 and 7 are available for this sort of thing.
The build testsuite uses series 8 and 9 in a number of places
(i.e. all the ones that broke last night).
0..5 are used operationally. (2..5 only when an ephemeris changes,
so these are briefly available--i.e. between times when FDG gives
us something.)
So:
a) disable all the tests that broke, or
b) reinstall 8 back to the test ephemeris....
c) change the tests to use series 0
d) other options
Your choice.
--
Geoff (gbc at space.mit.edu)
On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 08:30:37AM -0400, Nathan Schwadron wrote:
> Hi Geoff
>
> This was a test file for starting to test new potential orbits. We were just verifying that Ken could install new ephemerides. I guess he didn't commit the change; thus the error.
>
> Nathan
>
> On Jun 18, 2010, at 8:25 AM, Geoffrey B. Crew wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 2010 at 08:03:50AM -0400, Geoffrey B. Crew wrote:
> >>> I say Yea. If someone has a reason for a Nay, say it soon.
> >>
> >> Will do, but the nightly carnage needs fixing first.
> >>
> >> There are two problems--Paul forgot to commit everything in his
> >> xhihb upgrade and something bad in spice land which I'll look into.
> >
> > On the former, you'll want to commit the offending file and
> > verify that that directory rebuilds properly. There are a
> > large number of compiler warning errors which Paul should
> > be a good do-be and fix.
> >
> > On the latter,
> >
> > $ l $IBEX_ANC/isoc/IBEX_series*
> > ...
> > -rwxrwxrwx 1 fairchild isoc 1112064 Jun 17 13:56 /home/gbc/IBEX/anc/isoc/IBEX_series_8.bsp
> >
> > I'm not sure what this is or why it is here, but this is the spice problem.
> >
> > Series 8 is reserved for a special testing ephemeris which, now that it is
> > not what it was yesterday, should indeed break a number of tests....
> >
> > Any idea how that file got there?
> >
> > --
> >
> > Geoff (gbc at space.mit.edu)
> >
> > Please restrict discussions on this email list to non-ITAR sensitive topics.
> > ______________________________________________
> > Isocops mailing list
> > Isocops at lists.sr.unh.edu
> > http://lists.sr.unh.edu/mailman/listinfo/isocops
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.sr.unh.edu/mailman/private/isocops/attachments/20100618/411e27df/attachment.html
More information about the Isocops
mailing list