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 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=173719 ------- Additional Comments From ed@xxxxxxx 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 prepend-path LD_LIBRARY_PATH $SOMEPACKAGE_HOME/lib ...etc... 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. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
