I also have a working Visit build too but not using EB vtk, they require a double build which is hard to deliver and you need to really hack the build script to supply it. On 22 Jun 2016 11:25 p.m., "Jack Perdue" <j-per...@tamu.edu> wrote:
> e.g.: http://www.siliconslick.com/VTK/ > > Quite the pain lining up all the X11 stuff... > > jack (still working on it for a proper VisIt... need the Qt OpenGL) > > On 06/22/2016 03:57 PM, Jack Perdue wrote: > >> On 06/22/2016 03:31 PM, McGough, Benjamin E wrote: >> >>> I have been struggling with creating a clean environment in which to >>> build with EasyBuild and test easyconfigs. >>> >> >> I wish I could be pardoned if I just left a: >> >> 8^) >> >> and walked away... >> >> You are not alone. >> >> On our present cluster, I have done the best to strip >> RH/CentOS -devel packages to force use of EB modules >> on GPFS. In terms of X11 I'm already convinced I'm going >> to try to get us to use the system X11 libs and not fight that >> battle with EB. EB's use of X11 _is_ very inconsistent. And >> a royal pain in the arse. >> >> I'm not complaining... I'm just saying that there is some tweaking >> that can be done. >> >> For our next cluster (RH/CentOS 6 or 7... dunno yet)... I plan to strip >> everything >> out of EB that I can get from CentOS or EPEL.... I'm sick of dealing >> with X11 in EB. >> >> Our new approach will basically be "if a customer requires an app that >> needs a newer version, build it with EB... else use the upstream version". >> >> In terms of EB, being a RH person for now, it would be nice to see two >> fully decked out easyconfig trees... one with all the -devel packages >> installed and one with none of them. >> >> Pretty sure I know who will have to do the work to see that happen. >> >> jack >> >> >> >> >
