On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 02:09:06PM +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote: > Also, we should decide (as a project) how to deal with MPI > implementations in general, meaning if we "support" only one, meaning > that packages build against one we chose, and the others are installed > as libraries, or if we build packages against all available ones. I'm > really unsure about this still. > > > On this basis, I think that it would be the case to hold on any > > re-implementation > > of the MPI related packaging for HDF5. It is much better defining a decent > > policy draft before proceeding with modifying packages here and there. > > Sure, that needs to be done. What do you mean by "holding on any > re-implementation"? >
A bug is open for HDF5 in order to use the preferred MPI scheme, instead of the current build-any implementation. I'm not sure it will be the final choice for Squeeze, so it is better waiting. -- Francesco P. Lovergine -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-science-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
