On 5 April 2017 at 13:01, Kevin Buckley
wrote:
> I also note that as things stand, the Relocation is used for all
> files except the Environment Module file, resulting from the
> rpmbuild beig done as follows
>
> --define 'install_shell_scripts 1' \
> --define 'install_modulefile 1' \
>
Just in case anyone is interested in following this, I'll
try and document what I'm doing here
I have a forked repo and added a branch here
https://github.com/vuw-ecs-kevin/ompi/tree/make-specfile-scl-capable
and have applied a series of small changes that allow for the building
of an RPM that a
On 31 March 2017 at 23:35, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
and Gilles, who said,
>> you should only use the tarballs from www.open-mpi.org
> The GitHub tarballs are simple tars of the git repo at a given hash (e.g.,
> the v2.0.2 tag in git). ...
Yep I'm aware of the way that GitHub tarbals ca
The GitHub tarballs are simple tars of the git repo at a given hash (e.g., the
v2.0.2 tag in git). They are not bootstrapped tarballs, and are not official
Open MPI distribution tarballs. You can tell that you have one of these
tarballs because it won't have a "configure" script. We can't tur
Kevin,
you should only use the tarballs from www.open-mpi.org
they are generated with our scripts.
if i understand correctly, github.com has its own way of generating a
tarball from a git tag.
Cheers,
Gilles
On 3/31/2017 1:24 PM, Kevin Buckley wrote:
On 29 March 2017 at 13:49, Jeff Squyr
On 29 March 2017 at 13:49, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
> I have no objections to this.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't have the time to work on it, but we'd be glad to look
> at pull requests to introduce this functionality. :-)
Yes, yes, alright.
I am though slightly confused, following the mov
I have no objections to this.
Unfortunately, I don't have the time to work on it, but we'd be glad to look at
pull requests to introduce this functionality. :-)
> On Mar 23, 2017, at 6:07 PM, Kevin Buckley
> wrote:
>
> Another than occured to me whilst looking around this
> was whether the
On Mar 23, 2017, at 5:25 PM, Kevin Buckley
wrote:
>
> * I think the reasoning for me, is that if the SRPM is being used to create
> an OpenMPI that will supercede the RHEL/CentOS system's version
> then adding the module into a system area is the right thing, but if an
> admin goes to the troubl
Another than occured to me whilst looking around this
was whether the OpenMPI SRPM might benefit from
being given proper "Software Collections" package
capability, as opposed to having the "install in opt"
option.
I don't claim to have enough insight to say either way
here, however the Software C
On 23 March 2017 at 23:41, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) wrote:
> Yoinks. Looks like this was an oversight. :-(
>
> Yes, I agree that install_in_opt should put the modulefile in /opt as well.
Actually, I have since read the SPEC file from top to bottom and seen a
Changelog entry (from you Jeff. from
Yoinks. Looks like this was an oversight. :-(
Yes, I agree that install_in_opt should put the modulefile in /opt as well.
If you could offer a patch or pull request, that would be awesome.
Thank you!
> On Mar 22, 2017, at 10:35 PM, Kevin Buckley
> wrote:
>
> Just came to rehash some old
11 matches
Mail list logo