[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Bug 173719] Review Request: openmpi - a new MPI implementation

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional
comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report.

Summary: Review Request:  openmpi - a new MPI implementation


------- Additional Comments From ed eh3 com  2006-02-16 00:53 EST -------
Hi Orion, most environment-module scripts that I've seen use syntax such as:

  prepend-path PATH $SOMEPACKAGE_HOME/bin
  prepend-path MANPATH $SOMEPACKAGE_HOME/man

which takes care of the binaries, libs, headers, etc.

And, if the Core packagers choose to avoid environment-modules and select 
one particular MPI implimentation as the "standard" for Core, thats still 
perfectly OK.  The "standard" or "preferred" MPI implimentation can be 
installed exactly as LAM is currently installed and then environment-
modules can be used in conjunction with any other MPI implimentatons 
(say, multiple one within Fedora Extras) per the above.  I know this works 
because many folks do this on their clustersand/or networks of workstations.  
For instance, we have the Core-supplied LAM installed and we have $N$ other
MPI implementations installed and they all work.

And users are free to *dynamically* select (whenever they want) which MPI 
bits they'd like to use for a particular task with either environment-
modules (which is, ultimately, just a convenience) or by manually selecting 
the desireed paths for builds, execution, etc.

Its that easy!  And it doesn't require any nasty static linking or other
ugly hacks.  Its very clean.

Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]