From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JU3qv-0008Jy-3h for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:44:29 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DF347E0319; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3FA6E0319 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gentoo.org (comet.dhcp.lbl.gov [131.243.195.187]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B0B866F33 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2008 17:44:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 09:44:24 -0800 From: Donnie Berkholz To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] Empi, should it be in the science overlay? Message-ID: <20080226174424.GA26209@comet.lbl.gov> References: <20080226154538.GC3622@mejis.cold-front> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080226154538.GC3622@mejis.cold-front> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: 6e598a74-5d4e-43a7-9deb-1b52c9d7a1f0 X-Archives-Hash: c21ed8b6f126856b384d2c4d6bec5ba7 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... > 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. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org mailing list