Bug#458812: ITP: aster -- Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software for engineering simulations
--- Mar 10/5/11, Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org> ha scritto:
> Da: Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org>
> Oggetto: Re: ITP: aster -- Finite Element Analysis (FEA) software for engineering simulations
> > > I would like to help in packaging the Code Aster
> software[1] for Debian.
> > Thanks for your interest in the packaging of Code
> Aster.
> > However, you should be aware of a license issue with
> metis-edf:
> > http://glaros.dtc.umn.edu/gkhome/node/686
> > To unblock, we should consider some uploads in
> non-free and contrib.
>
> How extensive are the differences between metis-edf and
> metis? Might it
> be worth porting those differences to Scotch? Or does
> Code Aster use
> some features of metis not present in Scotch, like
> element-wise
> partitioning (instead of node-wise)?
Hi,
I know nothing about mesh partitioning, scotch and metis; however here is
what Cristophe Trohime said to me when we talked about this a month ago
(the quoted text is mine):
"[...]> As far as I understand, it's actually possible to build CA without
> metis; however some functionalities will not be available
> (RENUM='METIS' in SOLVEUR), and this can be a rather annoying
> problem, since metis is the default renumerator; however,
> if CA can switch automatically to another renum, this may
> become just a performance issue (and a longer list of failing
> tests, if METIS is explicitly called).
> For replacing metis with scotch, the library by itself is already
> there (libscotchmetis), however what is missing are the executables:
> see this thread http://www.code-aster.org/forum2/viewtopic.php?id=14417
> , where André says "In case you succeed to make the tests from
> liste_internet pass with scotchmetis, I am very interested about your
> build (because it means that you can supply an alternative to onmetis,
> kmetis and onmetis.exe)."
I had the opportunity to discuss that with Mathieu Courtois, a ASTER developper, last year.
He tells me that if we choose Scotch instead of metis it will be better to call directly without using any additionnal programs. But my guess is this is a lot of work.
The other point is if you want to rewrite (on)metis with scotch you cannot do it easily.
They are using some calls to metis which do not exist in scotch.
As far as I understand they prefer to stick to metis which is more widespread than scotch. [...]"
So, if I get it right CA calls metis via an executable (onmetis,
konmetis, onmetis.exe). The difference between metis and metis-edf
is (i think) in these executables and in some other modification to
make it work with CA - maybe the int32/int64 issue.
Those executables are using some library calls that are not implemented
in scotch, and EDF doesn't seems interested to replace metis with scotch.
Bye
Reply to: