(back to [[Conference calls]])
Notes on the 15th EasyBuild conference call, Wednesday August 5th 2014 (3.15pm - 3.45pm CET)
- follow link in "Video calls" section on EasyBuild community Google+ page
Alphabetical list of attendees (5):
- Xavier Besseron (University of Luxembourg)
- Petar Forai (GMI, Austria)
- Kenneth Hoste (HPC-UGent, Belgium)
- Ward Poelmans (UGent, Belgium)
- Olav Smørholm (University of Warwick, UK)
- EasyBuild v1.15 release planning (Kenneth)
- improvements w.r.t. using a dummy/system toolchain (Petar)
- status update of support for hierarchical modules (Kenneth + anyone who has played around with it)
- EasyBuild v1.15.0: early Sept'14
- see Release schedule
- support for Lua module files in the works by Petar
- no notion of
conflict
in Lua module files? - ask Robert for Lua module file template
- 'dummy' doesn't really make sense, needs to be better documented
- better name name would be
system
, should be equivalent todummy
with an empty version (so dependencies are being loaded) - some easyblocks will suffer from this, since they rely on e.g.
self.toolchain.comp_family()
,mpi_family()
, etc. - another (better?) alternative is let EasyBuild install modules that simply wrap system tools
- we need a
System
(generic) easyblock that can be used to generate modules for system tools (e.g. GCC, OpenMPI, BLAS/LAPACK libraries, etc.) => Xavier?- make
eb
generate a module file, that can then be used as (part of) a toolchain - should simply allow for specifying installation paths (for
$PATH
,$CPATH
,$LD_LIBRARY_PATH
, etc.) - should maybe also support verifying whether the specified version is correct (e.g. check
gcc -V
vs specified version)?
- make
- we need a
- API for custom module naming schemes was enhanced in EasyBuild v1.14.0
- module name is split up into subdirectory in
$MODULEPATH
(e.g.Core
) and 'short' module name (e.g.GCC/4.8.3
) - include notion of module path extensions
- support for inspecting the toolchain, e.g. which compilers, MPI are included in it
- toolchains can be hidden from users by requesting to not include
module load <toolchain>
statements in generated module files- instead,
module load
statements are included for the different toolchain elements - this makes a lot of sense in the context of a hierarchy, to avoid useless module files polluting the tree
- instead,
- module name is split up into subdirectory in
Apps
vsCore
for application modules; how to avoid dependency conflicts for 'core' application modules?- issue a request for feedback on EasyBuild mailing list on support for hierarchical modules?