1Charles Leggett <CGLeggett@lbl.gov>

Raw Data BuilderRaw Data Builder

Package to transform UnpDataChunks into RawDataChunks.

In v00-03-00 of unpack_reco (not in any DØ release) pack_reco requires the UnpDataChunk to be made first (duh)

• calunpdata/CalMCToUnpReco• smtraw/SmtData2RawUnp• muo_unpdata/MuoMCToUnpReco

Been demonstrated to work producing both separately, and all together in one file: CAL_FE MUO_FE SMT_FE

And there was much rejoicing.....

2Charles Leggett <CGLeggett@lbl.gov>

How to Build a Calorimeter RDCHow to Build a Calorimeter RDC

packages: unpack_reco: v00-03-00 calunpdata: v00-03-01 caldata: head t85 good for everything else (t86 had build problems on IRIX)

add PackReco.x to unpack_reco/bin/BINARIES gmake unpack_reco.lib, unpack_reco.bin adjust thresholds (default set to 0.001 GeV) in

calunpdata/CalMCToUNPReco.rcp copy framework rcp file (“PackReco_fwk.rcp”), and

run configuration file (“cfg.dat”) from unpack_reco/bin to executable directory.

copy ReadEvent.rcp, WriteEvent.rcp to rcp directory run PackReco.x -rcp PackReco_fwk.rcp

3Charles Leggett <CGLeggett@lbl.gov>

Notes for Unpacker CodersNotes for Unpacker Coders

We’ve seen a lot of error messages like: ERROR: UnpDataChunk::createModuleList() factory was unable to create a module of type XXX mode YYY

This is because the module factory isn’t aware of the type of module that you’re asking for. It’s made aware of it via a registration macro that is found in the appropriate unpack_xxx_fe header file. Which means that this header needs to be included somewhere.

Best place to put it: framework registration source file for your MC UDC code.

This means that people who use your MC UDC package won’t have to bother you (me) when they can’t figure out why their program isn’t working.

4Charles Leggett <CGLeggett@lbl.gov>

Changes in calunpdata PackageChanges in calunpdata Package

Naming convention of programs in calunpdata package sucks. It’s been very confusing.

New scheme: CalPacked2RawReco CalMCToUnpReco CalRaw2PackedReco CalUnpToMCReco same thing for the framework registration macros, and rcp files

Also have replaced the debug flag with a debug_level rcp parameter. 0 means no debug info printed.

Someone from calorimeter group needs to tell me if the Gain table is accurate, and what’s the deal with: [11,18,17] [10,18,16] No electrical address translation [9,18,16] but exist in gain table (and in MC). [8,18,15]