I can rewrite ebuild for mpich2 and mvapich2 to use them with empi and
eselect mpi
2008/2/26, Justin Bronder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 26/02/08 09:44 -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > On 10:45 Tue 26 Feb , Justin Bronder wrote:
> > > I've been spending the majority of my Gentoo-related time working on a
> > > solution to bug 44132 [1], basically, trying to find a way to gracefully
> > > handle multiple installs of various MPI implementations at the same time
> in
> > > Gentoo. Theres more information about the solution in my devspace [2],
> but
> > > a quick summary is that there is a new package (empi) that is much like
> > > crossdev, a new eselect module for empi, and a new eclass that handles
> both
> > > mpi implementations and packages depending on mpi.
> >
> > Is it enough like crossdev enough to share code, with perhaps a bit of
> > abstraction? Maintaining the same thing twice is rarely a good idea...
>
>
> They are similar in that they both use the same finagling with portage to
> install things to different locations, but it pretty much ends there. So
> far as sharing code, I can see maybe the symlink, portdir and /etc/portage
> stuff that might be shared. Given that crossdev is ~650 lines and empi is
> half that though, I'm of the opinion that it's not worth the effort. The
> majority of the work in empi is reading command line arguments and testing to
> make sure preconditions are met.
>
>
> >
> > > So, I think I have pushed this work far enough along for it to actually
> be
> > > somewhat officially offered. My question then, is where should this be
> > > located? There are several mpi packages in the science overlay already,
> so
> > > should I push this work to there, or would it be more appropriate to
> make a
> > > new overlay specifically for hp-cluster?
> > >
> > > Future work related to this project will be getting all mpi
> implementations
> > > and dependant packages converted in the same overlay before bringing it
> up on
> > > -dev for discussion about inclusion into the main tree.
> > >
> > > I have no real preference either way, but the science team does already
> have
> > > an overlay :) Let me know what you think.
> >
> > Seems like people already committing cluster stuff to the sci overlay
> > could help; maybe they'll port packages, fix bugs, etc. With a new
> > overlay, we'd have to start from scratch, and I don't really see the
> > point.
>
>
> Pretty much sums up why I'm posting here :)
>
> --
>
> Justin Bronder
>
>
--
Gentoo GNU/Linux 2.6.23 Dual Xeon
Mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected] mailing list
