Hi everyone,
What is the point of versioning toolchains with an absolute number that is meaningless (what would "version 3" actually mean is anybody's guess).


While I think versioning toolchains will always be somewhat awkward, I think numbering it according to a date (or year) of release is what makes most sense.

Just my two cents.

Maxime

On 16-08-24 10:58, Eliot Eshelman wrote:
Thanks for the comments, Davide! I'll use your numbering if no one else objects.

My builds all look good, so I'm ready to submit the pull request. Or were you about to do so yourself?

I was hoping Kenneth would jump in and tell us if we're right or wrong. We can always adjust before he merges.

Eliot



On 08/23/2016 02:27 PM, Vanzo, Davide wrote:
Eliot,

I started working on the same toolchain and I have the same problem since the toolchain version numbering is not very clear. The temporary number I chose is 3.1.10 for the following reasons:


  * Since one of the elements got a major update (i.e. CUDA), I
    bumped the toolchainmajor version to 3
  * Since GCC got only a minor update with respect to gcccuda-2.6.10,
    I set the minor version to 1
  * I set the tiny version to 10 to allow other users to downgrade if
    needed


That was what came out from my personal interpretation of the toolchain version rules, but I could be completely wrong.


--
Davide Vanzo, PhD
Application Developer

Adjunct Assistant Professor of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering

Advanced Computing Center for Research and Education (ACCRE)

Vanderbilt University - Hill Center 201
(615)-875-9137
www.accre.vanderbilt.edu


On Aug 23 2016, at 1:15 pm, Eliot Eshelman <el...@microway.com> wrote:

    Hi Folks,

    I could use help with version numbering on a new toolchain.

    I manage a GPU cluster and am in the process of adding support
    for newer
    versions of CUDA. I'm working on CUDA 7.5 along with the FOSS
    tools from
    foss/2016a. When CUDA 8.0 comes out (soon) it can be paired with
    foss/2016b.

    The existing toolchain is gcccuda-2.6.10, which includes CUDA 5.5
    and
    GCC 4.8.2. I'm talking about moving to CUDA 7.5 and GCC 4.9.3-2.25.

    In that context, what version number should I give gcccuda? If
    CUDA 5
    was major version 2, then CUDA 6 would be version 3 and CUDA 7
    would be
    version 4? Bump up to gcccuda-4.0.0? And to gcccuda-5.0.0 when
    CUDA 8.0
    comes out?

    Once this is settled I'll submit pull requests on github for
    gcccuda,
    gompic, and goolfc with the newer version of CUDA and suitable GCC,
    OpenMPI, etc.

    Thanks!
    Eliot

-- Eliot Eshelman
    Microway, Inc.


--
Eliot Eshelman, Vice President
Strategic Accounts and HPC Initiatives

Microway, Inc.
12 Richards Road, Plymouth, MA 02360
(508) 732-5534
el...@microway.com
http://www.microway.com


--
---------------------------------
Maxime Boissonneault
Analyste de calcul - Calcul Québec, Université Laval
Président - Comité de coordination du soutien à la recherche de Calcul Québec
Team lead - Research Support National Team, Compute Canada
Instructeur Software Carpentry
Ph. D. en physique

Reply via email to