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 1JUIQd-0005S3-M1 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:18:19 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 73734E0639; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:18:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.168]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A4E9E0639 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 09:18:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 27so6085823wfd.10 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 01:18:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=x9KXw6dR07F0DnEgAHj26BjFz74kyBlGwxQ69PemVz0=; b=GU5TUjoRlVUCSjMRNVCphgjwZ8Okcv3mswqwQFkWX7CIZYBXBsS6RzxuxEYupLJELebHptLm0HOA1btiwIhmtC6TxcL5MhhQGPKiXy7c/ZVaCI50OvcmJdnm09OdcBnJnvvZupWcxkDzHjZzqL0h+qf/78AjxTFtqlanONXIADM= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=vGlQ3jvxWWDi/ZYKT5GG/3JNeFy91aiMcTwTJyVfZaFXWCyN5gkJViVJgytbqsa5buXXhK637MM6GsiaIoxZWYLcGdr5oNax5STqsdOtzOUXaKlfmLDkwyKQrS9mYij4y/HnmKK8xI+sKHmRpGTVOquz1gDCdIkPho5Vp6uhMyo= Received: by 10.142.99.21 with SMTP id w21mr4943347wfb.108.1204103897709; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 01:18:17 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.142.140.1 with HTTP; Wed, 27 Feb 2008 01:18:17 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:18:17 +0300 From: "Alexey Shvetsov" To: gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] Re: Empi, should it be in the science overlay? In-Reply-To: <20080226182135.GA4191@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=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20080226154538.GC3622@mejis.cold-front> <20080226174424.GA26209@comet.lbl.gov> <20080226182135.GA4191@mejis.cold-front> X-Archives-Salt: 9acd7e24-9c0d-4ac7-b379-79077ab3c71c X-Archives-Hash: 914a3ac8e72fa8aa12df83b52e86a889 I can rewrite ebuild for mpich2 and mvapich2 to use them with empi and eselect mpi 2008/2/26, Justin Bronder : > 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 alexxyum@gmail.com alexxy@gentoo.ru -- gentoo-science@lists.gentoo.org mailing list