On 26.7.2009 14:38, Jussi Lehtola wrote:
Hello again,
I have updated the MPI draft at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/MPI
to take into account the comments that araised in discussion on the
list.
Looks great, just three minor comments:
1) Shouldn't the suffix for OpenMPI be just "openmpi" instead of "mpi"?
It would be consistent with other suffixes (simply the %{name} of the
compiler package) and self-explanatory what implementation it is.
2) With the current directory layout (i.e. a FHS-friendly one), the
suffixes for binaries and libraries are not necessary anymore, am I
right? In that case I think they are even not desirable (what MPI
implementation (or no MPI) is used will be controlled by the
environment-modules so this would be just annoying when writing e.g.
scripts using MPI software etc.)
3) I've modified the draft with a SHOULD: split headers into
%{name}-headers. In this case %{name}-%{mpi}-devel needs to require only
%{name}-headers (otherwise %{name}-devel will pull in %{name}
unnecessarily). In my POV this could be even a MUST (the depedency on
the non-MPI build is really not needed). Please review the wiki diff
from its history!
Thanks for your effort!
Milos
--
Fedora-packaging mailing list
Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
