On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> 1. If Open MPI uses a build system that requires extra tools (such as cmake
> or jam or ...) to be installed in order to be built from source, would this
> be a deterrent to you installing Open MPI from a source tarball?
It wouldn't be a deterent, but why should I have to build and install
three packages instead of one? I haven't seen other projects adopting jam
and cmake, so they would be sort of "LAM-only" tools. This really
isn't a time conservation issue, because the build time difference between
JA/CM and AC/AM/LT would only be a minute or two. In fact, I would need
to configure LAM many times to make up for the time spent installing jam
and cmake. Now, if this is about portability or code maintainance, that's
another issue, but the choice between JA/CM and AC/AM/LT really only
affects how the package is configured.
> 2. If you answered yes to #1, what kind of system will you want to use Open
> MPI on? I.e., what [specific] flavor of system (architecture, operating
> system and version, etc.) would we need to provide a binary version of Open
> MPI for you to install?
Ooh, x86_64 under 2.6.x linux kernel for me (Fedora Core 2).
------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Ciani (aciani1_at_[hidden])
Computational Condensed Matter Physics
Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Chicago
http://ciani.phy.uic.edu/~tony
------------------------------------------------------------
|
