Open MPI logo

Open MPI User's 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: [OMPI users] Question about scheduler support
From: Ralph Castain (rhc_at_[hidden])
Date: 2014-05-15 17:40:06

On May 15, 2014, at 2:34 PM, Fabricio Cannini <fcannini_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> Em 15-05-2014 07:29, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) escreveu:
>> I think Ralph's email summed it up pretty well -- we unfortunately have (at least) two distinct groups of people who install OMPI:
>> a) those who know exactly what they want and don't want anything else
>> b) those who don't know exactly what they want and prefer to have everything installed, and have OMPI auto-select at run time exactly what to use based on the system on which it's running
>> We've traditionally catered to the b) crowd, and made some not-very-easy-to-use capabilities for the a) crowd (i.e., you can manually disable each plugin you don't want to build via configure, but the syntax is fairly laborious).
>> Ralph and I talked about the possibility of something analogous to "make menuconfig" for Linux kernels, where you get a menu-like system (UI TBD) to pick exactly what options you want/don't want. That will output a text config file that can be fed to configure, something along the lines of
>> ./configure --only-build-exactly-this-stuff=file-output-from-menuconfig
>> This idea is *very* rough; I anticipate that it will change quite a bit over time, and it'll take us a bit of time to design and implement it.
> Please allow me to chip in my $0.02 and suggest to not reinvent the wheel, but instead consider to migrate the build system to cmake :

LOL - that would require a massive rewrite that I don't think any of us are wiling to undertake! Besides, we looked at cmake before, and the negatives outweighed the benefits from our perspective at that time - not sure we'd change that opinion today.

> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users_at_[hidden]