Trying to get started
Hello All, I am trying to get started using Athena/Artemis. But I have the following problem. My computer is nearly brand new, uses XP and I now have 384 MB of RAM to go along with only 2.71 out of 35.54 GB used on the hard drive. But after I import data into Athena, and give the go ahead, the graphic screen just comes up and hangs up blank. It does NOT graph the data. If I try this on my lab computer that uses 98 there is no such problem.....the graphic screen works well. (There I get the well known "out of parameter space" error if I try to get much further. I would prefer to use my home computer, but will also try to fix up the old lab computer to work as recommended.) I am suspicious that this problem of the graphic screen hanging up with the XP computer might have something to do with my new computer having a liquid crystal display monitor???? Any ideas?? Sincerely, Doug Pease
On Saturday 07 February 2004 11:05 pm, doug pease wrote:
I am trying to get started using Athena/Artemis. But I have the following problem. My computer is nearly brand new, uses XP and I now have 384 MB of RAM to go along with only 2.71 out of 35.54 GB used on the hard drive. But after I import data into Athena, and give the go ahead, the graphic screen just comes up and hangs up blank. It does NOT graph the data.
I just fired up my Windows virtual machine and download the latest ifeffit installer to see what happens. I see the same behavior as Doug and Scott report. What's more, I see the same behavior using the ifeffit command line program. That is, running "ifeffit" from the DOS prompt, then entering these two commands read_data(file=cu010k.dat, group=a) plot(a.energy, a.xmu) crashes ifeffit. I don't have any advice at this point, particularly in light of Michel's report. I will state (again) that a small number of dedicated pre-testing volunteers could go a long way towards rooting out these problems *before* they get widely released. Of course, I have asked for volunteers of this sort in the past and have received, at best, unfulfilled promises. But I am willing once again to do my best Don Quixote impression.... B -- Bruce Ravel ----------------------------------- ravel@phys.washington.edu Code 6134, Building 3, Room 222 Naval Research Laboratory phone: (1) 202 767 5947 Washington DC 20375, USA fax: (1) 202 767 1697 NRL Synchrotron Radiation Consortium (NRL-SRC) Beamlines X11a, X11b, X23b National Synchrotron Light Source Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY 11973 My homepage: http://feff.phys.washington.edu/~ravel EXAFS software: http://feff.phys.washington.edu/~ravel/software/exafs/
Hi Everyone, Yep, I see the same failure of 1.2.5 on a WinXP machine, though it works on my main desktop. A clean install of 1.2.4, plus installing updater 1.1, and taking all the updates works for me (there is not yet an update that goes from 1.2.4+updates to 1.2.5). I believe the problem is that the grwnd.exe file got accidently changed in the release of Ifeffit 1.2.5. What I don't understand is why it worked for me (unless the older grwnd.exe was found somewhere earlier in the path???). I'll post a fix as soon as possible: both as ifeffit-1.2.5a.exe and as an update which should upgrade ifeffit-1.2.4 and the broken ifeffit-1.2.5. Hopefully, this will be available later this morning. I suspect that something else must be going on for Michel. I've seen Ifeffit 1.2.4 plus Updater 1.1 work well on many Windows machines. I haven't heard otherwise until this report. Bruce said:
I will state (again) that a small number of dedicated pre-testing volunteers could go a long way towards rooting out these problems *before* they get widely released. Of course, I have asked for volunteers of this sort in the past and have received, at best, unfulfilled promises. But I am willing once again to do my best Don Quixote impression....
There is no special category of beta-testers because no one has offered to do this. Having beta-testers would be OK with me. Having someone else take over build and support Windows releases would be even better, but I'm not optimistic about this. What is more likely is that Windows releases will fall very far behind source releases. The desire to release 1.2.5 for all platforms _definitely_ delayed the release of the source code, which won't happen again. Since there are no special beta-testers, everyone ends up being a beta-tester. So thanks to Doug and Scott and Michel for the reports, and sorry for the trouble! --Matt
participants (3)
-
Bruce Ravel -
doug pease -
Matt Newville