Re: MPI implementations in squeeze
On 01/12/09 at 11:33 +0100, Manuel Prinz wrote:
> Am Montag, den 09.11.2009, 16:47 -0800 schrieb Nicholas Breen:
> > * should we start filing wishlist bugs asking packagers not to build against
> > MPICH (1) and LAM?
>
> If noone objects by the end of the week, I will file the bugs then. The
> number of affected packages is really low and the severity wishlist, so
> I guess we do not need to go through the usual MBF hassle, or do we?
So the plan would be to use OpenMPI on all architectures where it is
supported, and MPICH2 on the other ones, using mpi-default?
What do we do with LAM and mpich1? Target their removal for squeeze?
While I would be fine with that, there are other possible plans:
(2) use MPICH2 as default everywhere (it is supported on all release
archs). Clearly, the package didn't receive a lot of testing yet,
but this is likely to be only a temporary problem.
(3) encourage people to provide packages for both MPICH2 and OpenMPI
(where possible, or only MPICH2 if OpenMPI not possible).
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: