Product: Fedora https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=913152 --- Comment #14 from Antonio Trande <trpost@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to comment #13) > > You can do it :-) > > I even assigned the bug to myself so I could act as your sponsor. Great ! :D > > I suggest you add a %check in the spec, somewhat like: > > %check > module load mpi > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../libmumps_seq:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH ./ssimpletest < > input_simpletest_real > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD:../lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH mpirun -np 2 ./ssimpletest < > input_simpletest_real Done. Spec URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS.spec SRPM URL: http://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/MUMPS/MUMPS-4.10.0-3.fc18.src.rpm > > I think it should also have some proper clarification of when and > how libmpiseq-4.10.0.so is used, also, it does not have a "simpler" > libmpiseq.so symlink to it like the other libraries generated. Is it > really required to generate the "sequential" mumps in the Fedora > environment? > If yes, maybe should also make a different examples build exercising it. > If not, probably could simplify significantly the spec by making only > the "non sequential" build. Well, this is what's reported in README file: Sequential version ------------------ You can use the parallel MPI version of MUMPS on a single processor. If you only plan to use MUMPS on a uniprocessor machine, and do not want to install parallel libraries such as MPI, ScaLAPACK, etc... then it might be more convenient to use one of the Makefile.<ARCH>.SEQ to build a sequential version of MUMPS instead of a parallel one. It seems me that can be used the only parallel version. Hold the sequential one can be an option. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=3qkfrMVxEz&a=cc_unsubscribe _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review