Open MPI logo

Hardware Locality Development Mailing List Archives

  |   Home   |   Support   |   FAQ   |  

This web mail archive is frozen.

This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.

You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails have been added to it since July of 2016.

Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.

Subject: Re: [hwloc-devel] lstopo-nox strikes back
From: Brice Goglin (Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2012-04-25 12:35:59

If we're going to install two lstopo binaries with different names, we
need good names now (instead of plugin trolls).

I think I would vote for lstopo (no X/cairo) and lstopo<suffix> so that
completion helps.


On 25/04/2012 11:38, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Hello,
> We recently got some complains from redhat/centos users that wanted to
> install hwloc on their cluster but couldn't because it brought so many
> X libraries that they don't care about.
> Debian solves this by having two hwloc packages: the main hwloc one,
> and hwloc-nox where cairo is disabled. You just install one of them,
> packages are marked as conflicting with each others.
> I asked Jirka, our fellow RPM hwloc packager. He feels that RPM
> distros don't work that way. They usually have a core 'foo' package
> without X, and something such as 'foo-gui' with the X-enabled binary.
> So you'd have lstopo and lstopo-gui installed at the same time.
> I don't have any preference but RPM is much more widely used than deb
> in HPC, so we must consider the issue, either in hwloc or in RPM
> packaging. And we need a solution that is consistent across distros
> (we don't want users to get lost because Debian/Ubuntu lstopo is
> graphical while RPM lstopo is not and lstopo-gui is).
> It's not hard to build two lstopo binaries in the same hwloc (quick
> patch attached). But we'd need to decide their names
> (lstopo/lstopo-nox, lstopo/lstopo-nogui, lstopo-gui/lstopo), and find
> a good way to make the existing packages deal with them.
> How do people feel about this? Is it ok to choose between hwloc and
> hwloc-nox packages on Debian/Ubuntu? Does somebody want to *always*
> have a lstopo-nox installed? Should the default lstopo be
> graphical/cario or not?
> Brice
> _______________________________________________
> hwloc-devel mailing list
> hwloc-devel_at_[hidden]