| 1 |
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Barry Schwartz |
| 2 |
<chemoelectric@×××××××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Volker Armin Hemmann <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com> skribis: |
| 4 |
>> ok, I tried ekopath: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> UCBFAIL indicates problems! |
| 7 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/ccos_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in COS(X) at line 444 for generic |
| 8 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/cexp_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in EXP(X) at line 444 for generic |
| 9 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in ceild at line 701 for double |
| 10 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in coshd at line 701 for double |
| 11 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in floord at line 701 for double |
| 12 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/clib_DP.output:UCBFAIL clib_DP.output , 25 out of 25 tests |
| 13 |
>> completed |
| 14 |
>> /tmp/usbtest/csin_DP.output: ucbtest UCBFAIL in SIN(X) at line 444 for generic |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> only 10 out of 14 show UCBPASS! |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> That must be what they mean by "Industry proven robustness and |
| 19 |
> quality" |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Do you have any info about _any_ system passing this 100% successfully? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
What about that the code itself might have a bug in it? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
- Mark |
Archives