Hi Geert-Jan, On 28 Jun 2013, at 16:34, Geert Jan BEX wrote:
> Hi Kenneth, > > The time I spent on it was not wasted, it was a good learning experience. > > I had a look at the pull request for the easyblock, this is almost identical > to my version (apart from somewhat different no_qa). My easyblock is also > somewhat simpler since I set a number of options via the easyconfig, rather > than in the easyblock. I often prefer to put things in the easyblock that are critical, i.e. that have to be there in order for the build to work. It's OK to provide additional parameters in the easyconfig file to make things more flexible though. Please use the pull request to communicate any remarks/suggestions you may have w.r.t. the easyblock, that keeps things more manageable. If you have suggestions for things you really think should be adjusted, please let us know via the PR ASAP, I will be merging in pull requests all throughout the week for inclusion in EasyBuild v1.6. > I have a slight problem with the easyconfigs though. Qt has a dependency on > GLib, which is not installed on our compute nodes. I've an easyconfig for > GLib, I've done a push to our fork. My easyconfig for Qt depends on it. I > haven't pushed the Qt stuff yet, since I'd prefer to test whether it works > properly. Ah, that's something we've missed. Please open a pull request for the GLib easyconfigs, and make a remark on the Qt easyconfigs PR that this dep is missing. I'll adjust it accordingly. > Something that I also modified are the easyconfigs for icc, ifort, impi and > mkl. The current easyconfigs assume that the license file will be present in > a directory in easybuild's home directory. I've added a test to check for > INTEL_LICENSE_FILE, if set, it uses that, if not, it reverts to standard > behavior. This allows for us to have our license files elsewhere, which we > prefer. This too has been pushed to our fork. That might be useful for > others as well. That makes sense, but maybe we should add that in the easyblock instead. Easyconfig files are now executed as Python code, but we want to step away from that. We could make the easyblock use whatever value is set in $INTEL_LICENSE_FILE if it is set, and use the license_file easyconfig parameter as a fallback. That way, the easyconfigs can stay as is (and no Python code that needs to be executed has to be added), and things can be made more flexible. How does that sound? regards, Kenneth
