Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=497622 --- Comment #27 from Tim Fenn <fenn@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2009-07-23 21:42:23 EDT --- (In reply to comment #26) > apbs has support for: > --with-mpich=PATH toplevel MPICH directory > --with-mpich2=PATH toplevel MPICH2 directory > --with-lam=PATH toplevel LAM-MPI directory > --with-openmpi enable OpenMPI compilation > so I suggest you add these to the package in the future. > > I have suggested an MPI packaging draft and an environment modules packaging > draft, which would standardize the way MPI stuff is packaged. > > - Add BR: arpack-devel and --with-arpack to enable support for ARPACK. > > - Add BR: python-devel and --with-python to enable support for Python. > Adding --with-arpack enables building of a "driver" binary that is part of the tools folder, which is just copied to the share directory in the install-data-local macro, so its not required for APBS. Would it be best to set up a -tools subpackage with all the extras? (see here: http://cardon.wustl.edu/MediaWiki/index.php/An_overview_of_the_APBS_package#Other_tools_distributed_with_APBS for more info) And I'm also worried about having a binary just called "driver" lying around - could that be an issue? Adding --enable-python doesn't do anything other than build ZSI (which it shouldn't do) - which I realized, python-ZSI should be a requires so ApbsClient.py runs properly. I'm working on the remaining issues, but I wanted to check with this before I finish it off. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Fedora-package-review mailing list Fedora-package-review@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-package-review