Thanks. Perfect, you'll have to introduce fixes with a bit of delay
otherwise we'll all get used to that speed and soon enough maintaining EB
will be a full time job if it isn't already :)
So my memory wasn't quite accurate, apologies!
Kenneth Hoste <kenneth.ho...@ugent.be> schrieb am Di., 29. Nov. 2016 um
> Hi Martin,
> On 29/11/16 10:25, Martin wrote:
> Pretty soon after the 3.0 release I saw some message pass by that EB
> messes up easyconfigs that are being submitted to the repository (something
> along the lines, I can't quite remember and can't find the message now).
> Kenneth pretty much closed the discussion with "It's a bug. It needs
> So would you recommend to be using 3.0 in production or should I wait for
> 3.1 (or was there a patch release that I did miss?) so that this bug will
> be fixed. I'd rather not have corrupt easyconfigs since we have quite a few
> of them that are for internal use and I'm not really all too keen on
> messing things up now that users start to write easyconfigs and the first
> roots of "hey this is actually useful" start to show among people.
> First, this is only a problem if you are using --minimal-toolchains; if
> not, you will not be affected by this.
> In addition, the easyconfig files are not 'corrupt', they are just not a
> copy of the original easyconfig file that was used, in the sense that they
> have some template values expanded, etc.
> The easyconfig files dumped to the archive with EasyBuild v3.0.0 if you
> have --minimal-toolchains enabled can still be used later to reproduce an
> installation, they're just not 'clean'.
> The bug was fixed in
> https://github.com/hpcugent/easybuild-framework/pull/2028, which got
> merged yesterday.
> I am currently finishing up testing for the EasyBuild v3.0.1 release,
> which should go out tomorrow.
> Mobil: +43 / 660 / 62 45 103 <0660%206245103>
> UID: ATU68801424
Mobil: +43 / 660 / 62 45 103