Test report by @boegel
FAILED
Build succeeded for 2 out of 5 (3 easyconfigs in this PR)
Linux SL 6.7, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz, Python 2.6.6
See https://gist.github.com/dac7991e292cc5fa0247 for a full test report.

Easyconfigs unit test suite PASSed (see https://jenkins1.ugent.be/job/easybuild-easyconfigs-pr-builder/5133/console for more details).

This pull request is now ready for review/testing.

Please try and find someone who can tackle this; contact @boegel if you're not sure what to do.

Test report by @boegel
FAILED
Build succeeded for 7 out of 10 (3 easyconfigs in this PR)
Linux centos linux 7.1.1503, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/c6cabfa9be240a909c3f for a full test report.

failed tests are due to a bug in framework develop, which gets triggered by the extra easyconfig parameter that is defined in the numpy easyblock (cfr. easybuilders/easybuild-easyblocks#757);
installing numpy as an extension is now broken, working on a fix

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 3 out of 3 (3 easyconfigs in this PR)
Linux SL 6.7, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2670 0 @ 2.60GHz, Python 2.6.6
See https://gist.github.com/d69c619c4db9f19da24f for a full test report.

Test report by @boegel
SUCCESS
Build succeeded for 3 out of 3 (3 easyconfigs in this PR)
Linux centos linux 7.1.1503, Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2680 v3 @ 2.50GHz, Python 2.7.5
See https://gist.github.com/5eb66248a4eece42ed2e for a full test report.

looks fine

just a toolchain bump, going in

@rjeschmi: thanks for the review! :)