guix-patches
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

[bug#39588] gnu: Add mpich, scalapack-mpich, mumps-mpich, pt-scotch-mpic


From: zimoun
Subject: [bug#39588] gnu: Add mpich, scalapack-mpich, mumps-mpich, pt-scotch-mpich, python-mpi4py-mpich
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 19:20:44 +0100

Hi,

Thank you Maurice for the packages! :-)


On Mon, 17 Feb 2020 at 18:27, Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> wrote:

> As for the “-mpich” packages: they look good to me, though I’m not
> entirely sure whether we should create “-mpich” variants for each of
> them.  Ideally ‘--with-inputs’ would be enough, but I don’t know.  At
> the same time, those variants don’t cost us much, so if they’re useful,
> why not.

Is it not related to "package parameters" or the discussion we had
about rebuilding everything with another compiler?
Other said, '--with-inputs' will do the job for explicit packages but
not the implicit ones.

One easy move should to generalize -- if possible -- what is done in
'with-python2' or 'with-ocaml4.07'. But I am not convinced it is easy
because it is clearly dependant on the build system.

On the other hand, I gave a look at spack (after the discussion at
FOSDEM) and how they do. The WIP branch [1] about the solver is
interesting: possibly catch incompatibilities earlier using solver
(SAT or other) and specifications. But I am not convinced neither it
is the way to go because it adds a lot of complexity for a gain that
could be discussed. ;-)


[1] https://github.com/spack/spack/tree/features/solver/lib/spack/spack/solver


Well, for these particular patches, the variants are ok.
But we should think about how to ease the variant generation of all the chain.


Cheers,
simon





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]