On Fri, 4 Jun 2004, Richard Hadsell wrote:
>> In LAM 7.1, there will be a "prefix" option to lamboot where you can
>> specify a prefix path directory for the lamd (and therefore PATH) on
>> remote nodes using the rsh module. This effectively allows you to
>> specify the directory where LAM is installed on remote nodes without
>> touching "dot" files.
>
> Great! That's exactly what I was hoping for. Are you willing to
> predict its release date (month, year, millenium, ...)?
"Soon" -- as in, within the next few months. I hate to predict, because
every time I do, I turn out to be wrong. ;-)
> And thanks for the lengthy explanation. We'll still have to use the
> .lamrc scheme for the transition to 7.1, given that the current lamboot
> doesn't support a prefix option.
Makes sense.
> You didn't mention LAMHOME. Is that no longer necessary for lamboot,
> lamd, or mpirun? Or was that always just a convenience for setting up
> PATH?
LAMHOME is never necessary. We actually discourage its use.
It's a throwback to prior versions of LAM that allowed that as a mechanism
to "re-root" your LAM installation, similar to .lamrc kinds of things.
That allowed you to switch between different installations of the *same*
version of LAM, which was really only relevant in pre-7.x versions (i.e.,
before the component architecture stuff where all RPI modules and whatnot
are available in one installation). We find it significantly simpler to
change the $PATH and whatnot -- an unintentionally-set $LAMHOME has been
the source of confusion for many a user.
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} jsquyres_at_[hidden]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/
|
