Interesting point - no reason why we couldn't use that functionality for
this purpose. Good idea!
On 7/11/07 5:38 AM, "Jeff Squyres" wrote:
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Ralph H Castain wrote:
>
>>> 2. It may be useful to have some high-level parameters to specify a
>>>
Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Ralph H Castain wrote:
2. It may be useful to have some high-level parameters to specify a
specific run-time environment, since ORTE has multiple, related
frameworks (e.g., RAS and PLS). E.g., "orte_base_launcher=tm", or
somesuch.
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:26 PM, Ralph H Castain wrote:
2. It may be useful to have some high-level parameters to specify a
specific run-time environment, since ORTE has multiple, related
frameworks (e.g., RAS and PLS). E.g., "orte_base_launcher=tm", or
somesuch.
I was just writing this up in an
Point taken.
Is this an accurate summary?
1. "Best practices" should be documented, to include sysadmins
specifically itemizing what components should be used on their
systems (e.g., in an environment variable or the system-wide MCA
parameters file).
2. It may be useful to have some
On Jul 10, 2007, at 9:51 AM, Brian Barrett wrote:
Actually, there are --with-slurm/--without-slurm options. We
default to
building slurm support automatically on linux and aix, but not on
other
platforms.
On a mostly unrelated note... We should probably also now build the
SLURM component for
On Jul 10, 2007, at 7:09 AM, Tim Prins wrote:
Jeff Squyres wrote:
2. The "--enable-mca-no-build" option takes a comma-delimited list of
components that will then not be built. Granted, this option isn't
exactly intuitive, but it was the best that we could think of at the
time to present a
Jeff Squyres wrote:
2. The "--enable-mca-no-build" option takes a comma-delimited list of
components that will then not be built. Granted, this option isn't
exactly intuitive, but it was the best that we could think of at the
time to present a general solution for inhibiting the build of a
Actually, I was talking specifically about configuration at build time. I
realize there are trade-offs here, and suspect we can find a common ground.
The problem with using the options Jeff described is that they require
knowledge on the part of the builder as to what environments have had their
On Jul 10, 2007, at 6:07 AM, Bogdan Costescu wrote:
For example, I can readily find machines that are running TM, but
also have LSF and SLURM libraries installed (although those
environments are not "active" - the libraries in some cases are old
and stale, usually present because either someone
* Jeff Squyres wrote on Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 01:28:40PM CEST:
> On Jul 10, 2007, at 2:42 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> >> 1. The most obvious one (to me, at least) is to require that
> >> people provide
> >> "--with-xx" when they build the system.
> >
> > I'll throw in another one for good
On Jul 10, 2007, at 2:42 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
1. The most obvious one (to me, at least) is to require that
people provide
"--with-xx" when they build the system.
I'll throw in another one for good measure: If --with-xx is given,
build with the component. If --without-xx is given,
On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Ralph Castain wrote:
For example, I can readily find machines that are running TM, but
also have LSF and SLURM libraries installed (although those
environments are not "active" - the libraries in some cases are old
and stale, usually present because either someone wanted
Hello Ralph,
* Ralph Castain wrote on Tue, Jul 10, 2007 at 03:51:06AM CEST:
>
> The problem is that our Open MPI build system automatically detects the
> presence of those libraries, builds the corresponding components, and then
> links those libraries into our system. Unfortunately, this causes
Yo all
I have been working on adding/clarifying support for several environments
and have encountered a problem that appears to be fairly common out there.
Namely, machines that have - over the course of history or for specific
reasons - installed libraries to support multiple environments. For
14 matches
Mail list logo