Kenneth, Thanks for the response, see inline.
> Do you have a full list of application, and which > compilers/MPI/BLAS/LAPACK you're aiming for? > Compilers: - gcc-4.8.x - intel-2013_SP1.3 MPI: - MVAPICH2-2.0 - OpenMPI-1.8.1 BLAS/LAPACK: - ACML 6.0.x - OpenBLAS-0.2.10 - LAPACK-3.5.x I don't know what category these go under as it was my colleague, who understands these programs better than I, who built them: * hdf5 * netcdf * suitesparse-4.3.1 * octave-3.8.1 * petsc-3.5.1 Full list of what is currently in our Lmod instance: http://www.brazos.tamu.edu/docs/apps.php > One remark here: we generally strictly separate software install > directories from module install directories, i.e. I'd use > "/apps/software" and "/apps/modulefiles". > > Not that I can think of a very good reason for that, however. ;-) Ya, I noticed that from EB configs. I can't think of why I didn't...likely something I decided based on our "old" cluster's TCL layout. > > Are you using helper function to avoid having to copy-paste-adjust > largely similar blocks across Lua module files, or because some > functionality is missing in Lmod that you need? > > What I'm really asking is: which helper functions would you still > need > if the (Lua) module files are generated automagically for you (e.g. > by > EasyBuild)? It's both avoiding copy&paste as well as "missing" functionality. The functionality isn't so much missing just that it's part of the "contrib" portion of Lmod and not part of the core functionality. Here's my SitePackage.lua - https://gist.github.com/treydock/ca9db395f604f59c1ea5 All the functions could likely be replaced by EB's automagic except the following: logUsage & load_hook - Not yet used but on TODO list , As long as Lua files were used and SitePackage loaded, these should work even with EB (if EB used Lua). But that's my guess. setenv_ifunset - Useful as we set runtime variables like OMP_NUM_THREADS=1 unless a user has already set them, and warn user about the default being set (so they can override if they wish). > EasyBuild won't allow you to install stuff as root, since it's > generally > a bad idea (who knows what those crazy scientists have come up with > in > their code ;-)). Yes, that is too true and a precaution I need to adopt. > The Lua module files are a blocker for now, yes, but we're on that, > as > I've already mentioned to you. I'll bug Petar some more to get our > hands > on his work w.r.t. adding support for generating Lua module files... > > Depending on how heavily you would still need your custom helper > functions, we may need to provide hooks that you can tap into to get > your site-specific tweaks included as well, but that shouldn't be too > hard (we already support stuff like --modules-footer that > 'modtclfooter' > easyconfig parameter). > Excellent. By no means should you or Petar feel rushed to push anything through on my account. The likelihood I'll be able to keep pace and make use of any new features is very low, which is no way a fault of EB. > Generating one set of module files with EB, and then "translating" > those > to the ones you expose to users isn't something we had to deal with > before, so it won't work. > I also think it's not a very good idea to do so (especially in the > long > run), you'll run into all kinds of surprises... I can see what you mean, and makes complete sense. > We've been using a dedicated user for building/installing software, > which we share with multiple people. Which is a bad idea, for > practical > purposes. :-) > The proper way to do it is what you're suggesting: give users the > required permissions, and maybe also make them act under a common > 'easybuild' (POSIX) group. Shared accounts I can handle, but our University has strict policies against it. Of course things like "root" are technically shared and their are rules we have to follow for that too. I like the idea of groups, but seems a lot of 'make install' scripts may set the permissions and override umask or I simply did not use the EB umask feature correctly. > Consider using `/dev/shm` here. That is a good idea, and something I overlooked when translating "old" ways into EB. > There be dragons here with EasyBuild v1.14.0 (see > https://github.com/hpcugent/easybuild-framework/issues/1011). The > open > issues should hopefully be fixed by EasyBuild v1.15.0 (it's looking > promising, PRs are open for most of the issues, especially the most > important/tricky ones). > Excellent, I'll keep an eye out on that issue. > > Check out --set-gid-bit, --sticky-bit and --group too. > Is there a way to make it so that everything I install is read/write by myself and my group? I tried setting --group and that removed all permissions from "other". I have --set-gid-bit and --sticky-bit also set with --umask=002 and everything is still 755 or 644. Thanks, - Trey
