-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
dll error executing the win_64 version #9
Comments
@drjfloyd , |
It looks like the release is just an executable rather than an install package which contains the DLL. Do you have FDS installed on your system? If you do, try copying the dll from the FDS install directory (it is part of the FDS installation package) to where the RADCAL executable is. |
I guess we could also replace the win 64 exe on the release page with a zip file containing the exec and the dll |
Can you try to create an independent directory (outside FDS PATH) for RADCAL and test. Then, yes, we can replace the current download with a .zip with necessary libraries. |
dumpbin /imports shows four DLLs are linked. Three are windows system DLLs (advapi32, imagehlp, and kernel32) and the fourth is libiomp5md. libiomp5md.dll only links to kernel32.dll. |
Problem still persists in 2021. Has there been any progress at all at fixing this? |
I did a little digging and found out that the libiomp5md.dll is part of the redistributable libraries for Intel's Fortran and c++ libraries. Also, I was able to compile the source files with gfortran (GNU Fortran) v. 11.2.0 to run with windows (using mingw-w64). However, I have noticed some differences with the default case, and I noticed the following differences:
Note: gfortran compiler (11.2.0) on Linux (Ubuntu 20.04) yielded identical results as the gfortran on windows compiler (or as close as I can tell). NB: Intel Fortran traces are on top. |
The radcal exe on github is from 2016 and there has been a slight change to how soot is dealt with since then. If I edit the default radcal.in file and zero out the soot, the radcal exe on github and the radcal compiled with the current source give the same result. Your newly compiled version is OK. |
Thanks for looking at that. It is greatly appreciated! Also, since the source of the .dll has been founds, should this issue be closed? |
@mas-co Would you mind sharing how you were able to compile with gfortran (modified makefile)? |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: