November 2010 - Comp-phys-alps-users

OpenMP flags issue in ALPS 2
by jessica.alfonsi＠unipd.it 03 Nov '10

03 Nov '10

Hi again Matthias, this mail is about a different issue, maybe with the Cmake Build system, which I have found both with GCC, Intel and Visual Age compilers when compiling ALPS 2 (any beta) with OpenMP support turned on. I should expect in the include.mk file to find the related compiler flag for multithreading (-fopenmp with GCC, etc) as it happened with ALPS 1.3.5, but it doesn't appear anywhere and I have to add it by hand when I have to compile my codes using OpenMP. Since ALPS 1.3.5 worked right, I think that should be fixed in ALPS 2. Best regards, Jessica

2 4

ALPS Bug?
by Emanuele Dalla Torre 03 Nov '10

03 Nov '10

Dear ALPS, thank you for existing! I found something that looks like a bug. I use the worm algorithm (Windows XP) with the following parameter file. When I run the code, it exits without giving any detail. If I change the letter W with any other letter it works. LATTICE="square lattice"; L=4; MODEL_LIBRARY="pairedBEC.model.xml" MODEL="boson Hubbard"; NONLOCAL=0; V = 1.0; W = 0.1; mu = 0.5; Nmax = 2; T = 0.1; SWEEPS=500000; THERMALIZATION=10000; { t=0.01; }

3 2

Fwd: Problem in ALPS 2.0b4 which does not occur in ALPS 1.3.3
by Matthias Troyer 02 Nov '10

02 Nov '10

Urs, can you please send your input files, especially the lattice file. Could you please also check whether the dirloop_sse_v1 code, which is the old code, works on your input? Matthias Begin forwarded message: > From: Sergei Isakov <isakov(a)itp.phys.ethz.ch> > Date: October 28, 2010 18:59:30 GMT+02:00 > To: Matthias Troyer <troyer(a)phys.ethz.ch> > Subject: Re: [ALPS-users] Problem in ALPS 2.0b4 which does not occur in ALPS 1.3.3 > > I don't really understand this output. I probably need that lattices-ug.xml file to check. Does dirloop_sse_v1 work? > > Best, > Sergei > > > On 28 Oct 2010, at 18:47, Matthias Troyer wrote: > >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> From: Urs Gerber ITP <gerberu(a)itp.unibe.ch> >>> Date: October 28, 2010 15:43:38 GMT+02:00 >>> To: comp-phys-alps-users(a)lists.phys.ethz.ch >>> Subject: [ALPS-users] Problem in ALPS 2.0b4 which does not occur in ALPS 1.3.3 >>> Reply-To: comp-phys-alps-users(a)lists.phys.ethz.ch >>> >>> Here are the files I use and the output I get: >>> >>> bilayer-test: >>> >>> LATTICE_LIBRARY="./../lattices-ug.xml"; >>> LATTICE="latticegraph square bilayer"; >>> MODEL_LIBRARY="./../models.xml"; >>> MODEL="spin"; >>> local_S=1/2; >>> L = 12; >>> Jxy0=1; >>> Jz0=3.3; >>> Jxy1=3.45; >>> Jz1=3.45; >>> THERMALIZATION=1000; >>> SWEEPS=1000; >>> beta=48; >>> {h0=7.5;} >>> >>> >>> bilayer-test.in.xml: >>> >>> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> >>> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="ALPS.xsl"?> >>> <JOB xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="http://xml.comp-phys.org/2003/8/job.xsd"> >>> <OUTPUT file="bilayer-test.out.xml"/> >>> <TASK status="new"> >>> <INPUT file="bilayer-test.task1.in.xml"/> >>> <OUTPUT file="bilayer-test.task1.out.xml"/> >>> </TASK> >>> </JOB> >>> >>> output in the terminal: >>> >>> Quantum Monte Carlo simulations using the SSE algorithm v. 4.0 >>> available from http://alps.comp-phys.org/ >>> copyright (c) 2003-2010 by Sergei Isakov <isakov(a)itp.phys.ethz.ch> >>> >>> using the ALPS parallelizing scheduler >>> copyright (c) 1994-2006 by Matthias Troyer <troyer(a)comp-phys.org>. >>> see Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 1505, p. 191 (1998). >>> >>> based on the ALPS libraries version 2.0.0b4 >>> available from http://alps.comp-phys.org/ >>> copyright (c) 1994-2010 by the ALPS collaboration. >>> Consult the web page for license details. >>> For details see the publication: >>> A.F. Albuquerque et al., J. of Magn. and Magn. Materials 310, 1187 (2007). >>> >>> parsing task files ... >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0.84127 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0.84127 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 5 >>> >>> Final solution 0.84127 at iteration 5. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 5, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 5.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 5 >>> >>> Final solution 0.84127 at iteration 5. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 5, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 5.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0.465116 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0.465116 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 5 >>> >>> Final solution 0.465116 at iteration 5. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 5, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 5.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 42 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 5 >>> >>> Final solution 0.465116 at iteration 5. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 5, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 5.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.001 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Model name: '' - run #1 >>> Objective: Minimize(R0) >>> >>> SUBMITTED >>> Model size: 18 constraints, 9 variables, 48 non-zeros. >>> Constraints: 18 equality, 0 GUB, 0 SOS. >>> Variables: 0 integer, 0 semi-cont., 0 SOS. >>> >>> Using DUAL simplex for phase 1 and PRIMAL simplex for phase 2. >>> >>> Optimal solution with dual simplex at iteration 6 >>> >>> Final solution 0 at iteration 6. >>> >>> Excellent numeric accuracy ||*|| = 0 >>> >>> Memo: Largest [etaPFI v1.0] inv(B) had 0 NZ entries, 0.0x largest basis. >>> In the total iteration count 6, 0 (0.0%) were minor/bound swaps. >>> There were 0 refactorizations, 0 triggered by time and 0 by density. >>> ... on average 6.0 major pivots per refactorization. >>> Total solver time was 0.000 seconds. >>> Created run 1 locally >>> Starting task 1. >>> >>> >>> After this it stops creating output in the terminal and no output files are produced. >>> >

4 7

ALPS binary packages for Debian (amd64)
by Ryo IGARASHI 02 Nov '10

02 Nov '10

Hi, I have created binary packages of ALPS 2.0.0b4 for Debian GNU/Linux (primary for sid(unstable), but should work also on squeeze(testing)). The apt line is as follows (I also updated ALPS wiki): deb http://alps.comp-phys.org/static/software/debian/sid ./ deb-src http://alps.comp-phys.org/static/software/debian/sid ./ Currently, I have only compiled amd64 packages. I can run python-based tutorials with these binary packages[1], but if you find any bugs related to debian packaging, please open the trac ticket and assign to me(rigarash) or just report to the ML. This packaging scheme can be applied of course to the Ubuntu system, I will try to build Ubuntu package (10.10) soon. [1] Since all binaries/scripts are installed system-wide, use 'python' instead of 'alpspython'. -- Ryo IGARASHI, Ph.D. rigarash(a)hosi.phys.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp OpenPGP fingerprint: BAD9 71E3 28F3 8952 5640 6A53 EC79 A280 6A19 2319

2 2

ALPS 2 compilation on AIX
by jessica.alfonsi＠unipd.it 02 Nov '10

02 Nov '10

Hello Matthias, your workaround for simpleobseval.h worked fine and compilation of examples/tests/applications has made further progress. Now I've found the following error message: "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b3_20101021/alps/src/alps/model/operatordescriptor.h", line 99.40: 1540-0215 (S) The wrong number of arguments have been specified for "alps::SiteBasisDescriptor<short>::get_parameters(bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b3_20101021/alps/src/alps/model/operatordescriptor.h", line 95.1: 1540-0700 This occurs both in examples (printnumeric) and in applications (qmc), as reported below: (I) The previous message was produced while processing "alps::OperatorDescriptor<short>::apply<alps::site_state<short>,std::complex<double> >(site_state<short>, const SiteBasisDescriptor<short> &, const ParameterEvaluator<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b3_20101021/alps/src/alps/model/sitebasisdescriptor.h", line 114.20: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "alps::SiteBasisDescriptor<short>::apply<alps::site_state<short>,std::complex<double> >(const string &, site_state<short>, const ParameterEvaluator<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b3_20101021/alps/src/alps/model/siteterm.h", line 142.44: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "alps::SiteOperatorEvaluator<short,std::complex<double>,alps::site_state<short> >::partial_evaluate_function(const string &, const Expression<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b3_20101021/alps/src/alps/model/siteterm.h", line 62.7: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "class alps::SiteOperatorEvaluator<short,std::complex<double>,alps::site_state<short> >". make[2]: *** [example/model/CMakeFiles/print_numeric.dir/print_numeric.cpp.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [example/model/CMakeFiles/print_numeric.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 The previous message was produced while processing "alps::OperatorDescriptor<short>::apply<alps::site_state<short>,std::complex<double> >(site_state<short>, const SiteBasisDescriptor<short> &, const ParameterEvaluator<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b4-r4959-src-with-boost/alps/src/alps/model/sitebasisdescriptor.h", line 114.20: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "alps::SiteBasisDescriptor<short>::apply<alps::site_state<short>,std::complex<double> >(const string &, site_state<short>, const ParameterEvaluator<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b4-r4959-src-with-boost/alps/src/alps/model/siteterm.h", line 142.44: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "alps::SiteOperatorEvaluator<short,std::complex<double>,alps::site_state<short> >::partial_evaluate_function(const string &, const Expression<std::complex<double> > &, bool) const". "/gpfs/scratch/userexternal/jalfonsi/alps-2.0.0b4-r4959-src-with-boost/alps/src/alps/model/siteterm.h", line 62.7: 1540-0700 (I) The previous message was produced while processing "class alps::SiteOperatorEvaluator<short,std::complex<double>,alps::site_state<short> >". make[2]: *** [applications/qmc/checksign/CMakeFiles/checksign.dir/checksign.C.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [applications/qmc/checksign/CMakeFiles/checksign.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 It also occurs in my code, so I hope you can find a fix also for this, please. Thank you in advance for your help. Best Jessica

2 1