Hi I updated the build instructions using CMake, python3 and other minor inacuracies in this PR: https://github.com/apache/incubator-mxnet/pull/8578
Please have a look and comment. I also added a file in the root "DEVELOPMENT.md" which synthesizes how to build mxnet and run the unit tests to get started making changes. Your feedback is welcome. And if you can please test the instructions to check they work properly and nothing was missed. Pedro. On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 5:07 PM, Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> wrote: > Right. > > I tried now with the flavor that you requested and I have problems > generating the build file: > > Seems that I need the variable pslite_LINKER_LIBS_DEBUG which is not > set. Any idea on how to compile with this flavour? (dist KVSTORE) > > > > > ubuntu@ip-172-31-35-161:~/mxnet/build$ cmake -DUSE_CUDA=ON > -DUSE_DIST_KVSTORE=ON -GNinja .. > -- Found MKL (include: /usr/local/include, lib: /usr/local/lib/libmklml_gnu.so > -- Found OpenBLAS libraries: /usr/local/lib/libopenblas.so > -- Found OpenBLAS include: /usr/local/include > -- CUDA detected: 8.0 > -- Found cuDNN (include: /usr/local/cuda/include, library: > /usr/local/cuda/lib64/libcudnn.so) > -- Added CUDA NVCC flags for: sm_52 > -- Could NOT find Gperftools (missing: GPERFTOOLS_LIBRARIES > GPERFTOOLS_INCLUDE_DIR) > -- Could NOT find Jemalloc (missing: JEMALLOC_LIBRARY JEMALLOC_INCLUDE_DIR) > -- OpenCV_LIBS=opencv_core;opencv_highgui;opencv_imgproc;opencv_imgcodecs > -- OpenCV found (/usr/local/share/OpenCV) > -- Could NOT find Jemalloc (missing: JEMALLOC_LIBRARY JEMALLOC_INCLUDE_DIR) > -- Found cuDNN (include: /usr/local/cuda/include, library: > /usr/local/cuda/lib64/libcudnn.so) > You have called ADD_LIBRARY for library mxnet without any source > files. This typically indicates a problem with your CMakeLists.txt > file > -- Found PROTOBUF Compiler: /usr/local/bin/protoc > CMake Error at CMakeLists.txt:446 (target_link_libraries): > The "debug" argument must be followed by a library. > > > -- Configuring incomplete, errors occurred! > See also "/home/ubuntu/mxnet/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeOutput.log". > See also "/home/ubuntu/mxnet/build/CMakeFiles/CMakeError.log". > > > Regards. > > Pedro. > > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:52 PM, Bhavin Thaker <bhavintha...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I agree about your point on correctness -- do you know of any known >> correctness issues with Ninja? >> >> These build times seem to be NOT with GPU builds and distributed kvstore >> enabled -- could you please confirm? nvcc builds take a significant time. >> >> Bhavin Thaker. >> >> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 8:45 AM, Pedro Larroy <pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi >>> >>> For me it's more about correctness and reproducibility than build >>> times, nonetheless, seems that the ninja build is significantly faster >>> than the Make build: >>> >>> Make: >>> >>> real 4m32.779s >>> user 43m33.236s >>> sys 0m52.940s >>> >>> CMake + Ninja: >>> >>> real 3m30.794s >>> user 36m2.564s >>> sys 0m56.368s >>> >>> Compiled on an g3.4xlarge with ebs >>> >>> Provisioned IOPS SSD >>> >>> io (115000 iops) >>> >>> >>> Pedro. >>> >>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 4:07 PM, Bhavin Thaker <bhavintha...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > Hi Pedro, >>> > >>> > Using Ninja to improve build times is a good suggestion. Can you share >>> the >>> > build times you have observed with and without using Ninja? I presume you >>> > have enabled compile-time options for GPU builds and Distributed MXNet >>> for >>> > the builds you have experimented with. >>> > >>> > See also: >>> > https://ninja-build.org/manual.html >>> > >>> > Thanks, >>> > Bhavin Thaker. >>> > >>> > On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 7:57 AM, Pedro Larroy < >>> pedro.larroy.li...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> >> Hi >>> >> >>> >> I would like to update the MXNet build instructions. >>> >> >>> >> In particular I was thinking that it would be a good idea to update >>> >> the instructions to use CMake + Ninja. And add more information about >>> >> the different build flavours. >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> https://mxnet.incubator.apache.org/install/index.html >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> Thoughts? >>> >> >>>
