[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Task: parallel-* ?

Junichi Uekawa wrote:

Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@mit.edu> cum veritate scripsit:

So what does go on a master/head node, but not on the others? Is there a need for such a -master task?

I think:
mpich, lam-dev.
I don't remember if we included dhcp/bootp/rarp/tftp, but
if that's the case they would be on the master.

Makes sense (except lam-dev, it seems that should be in -dev rather than -master...). So there is a valid use for -dev, -master and -node.

I am skeptical we can make it into the tasks now, and I am also doubtful it should be a task.

On whether we can make it into tasksel, I can certainly try. Why don't you think it should be a task?

Maybe a meta-package, just not task-parallel-*
but call it parallel-* ?

That's another approach, but personally, I like the elegance of the tasksel system, particularly the ability to add one's package to a task just by putting Task: in control, instead of having to bug the maintainer of the meta-package.

I'm curious about your reluctance to create tasksel tasks...


-Adam P.

GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B  C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6

Welcome to the best software in the world today cafe! <http://lyre.mit.edu/%7Epowell/The_Best_Stuff_In_The_World_Today_Cafe.ogg>

Reply to: