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

Re: Bug#1064810: transition: mpi-defaults




On 15/08/2024 10:42, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
On 2024-07-13 10:54:19 +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
On 12/07/2024 22:56, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
On 2024-07-08 11:40:37 +0100, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
On 08/07/2024 11:34, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
Hi Alastair

On 2024-07-07 19:20:01 +0200, Sebastian Ramacher wrote:
Control: tags -1 confirmed

On 2024-02-26 06:40:41 +0000, Alastair McKinstry wrote:
Package: release.debian.org
Severity: normal
User: release.debian.org@packages.debian.org
Usertags: transition
X-Debbugs-Cc: mpi-defaults@packages.debian.org, debian-science@lists.debian.org
Control: affects -1 + src:mpi-defaults

OpenMPI 5.0 drops 32-bit support, so we need to move those archs to MPICH.
Let's go ahead with this change. Please switch the 32 bit architectures
to mpich.
Thanks for the upload of mpi-defaults. A fix for #1028172 is needed
though to continue with this transition. I would appreciate if you could
take a look at that bug.

Thanks for highlighting it. I'm preparing a fix now.
Most of the binNMUs are now scheduled. Not that
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/mpi-defaults.html still
lists quite a lot of packages. Some FTBFS, but others also depend on
both mpi-defaults and openmpi and build with openmpi. I would appreciate
if you could take a look at those packages and file bugs where
appropriate.

Cheers
Will do.  Thanks
Let's also start the openmpi 32 bit removal transition. The tracker is
https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/openmpi-rm32.html.

Same request as above: please check the packages that are marked as bad
on the tracker and file bugs to change to mpich or drop the 32 bit
binaries as appropriate.

Cheers

Note that mpich got caught up in the gcc 14 transition and FTBFS (#1057292)
I'm working on this as I write, (there is a patch from Adrian Bunk that fails to install for me, but I have it working now and am testing on amd64).

Regards
Alastair



Reply to: