Re: [gentoo-science] Re: Empi, should it be in the science overlay?

[Alexey Shvetsov]

I can rewrite ebuild for mpich2 and mvapich2 to use them with empi and
eselect mpi

2008/2/26, Justin Bronder <jsbronder@g.o>:
> On 26/02/08 09:44 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>  > On 10:45 Tue 26 Feb     , Justin Bronder wrote:
>  > > I've been spending the majority of my Gentoo-related time working on a
>  > > solution to bug 44132 [1], basically, trying to find a way to gracefully
>  > > handle multiple installs of various MPI implementations at the same time in
>  > > Gentoo.  Theres more information about the solution in my devspace [2], but
>  > > a quick summary is that there is a new package (empi) that is much like
>  > > crossdev, a new eselect module for empi, and a new eclass that handles both
>  > > mpi implementations and packages depending on mpi.
>  >
>  > Is it enough like crossdev enough to share code, with perhaps a bit of
>  > abstraction? Maintaining the same thing twice is rarely a good idea...
>
>
> They are similar in that they both use the same finagling with portage to
>  install things to different locations, but it pretty much ends there.  So
>  far as sharing code, I can see maybe the symlink, portdir and /etc/portage
>  stuff that might be shared.  Given that crossdev is ~650 lines and empi is
>  half that though, I'm of the opinion that it's not worth the effort.  The
>  majority of the work in empi is reading command line arguments and testing to
>  make sure preconditions are met.
>
>
>  >
>  > > So, I think I have pushed this work far enough along for it to actually be
>  > > somewhat officially offered.  My question then, is where should this be
>  > > located?  There are several mpi packages in the science overlay already, so
>  > > should I push this work to there, or would it be more appropriate to make a
>  > > new overlay specifically for hp-cluster?
>  > >
>  > > Future work related to this project will be getting all mpi implementations
>  > > and dependant packages converted in the same overlay before bringing it up on
>  > > -dev for discussion about inclusion into the main tree.
>  > >
>  > > I have no real preference either way, but the science team does already have
>  > > an overlay :)  Let me know what you think.
>  >
>  > Seems like people already committing cluster stuff to the sci overlay
>  > could help; maybe they'll port packages, fix bugs, etc. With a new
>  > overlay, we'd have to start from scratch, and I don't really see the
>  > point.
>
>
> Pretty much sums up why I'm posting here :)
>
>  --
>
> Justin Bronder
>
>


-- 
Gentoo GNU/Linux 2.6.23 Dual Xeon

Mail to
      alexxyum@×××××.com
      alexxy@××××××.ru
-- 
gentoo-science@l.g.o mailing list