GNU bug report logs - #47619
[PATCH] add pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared

Previous Next

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 47619 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 47619 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Franck Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>
To: guix-patches <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] add pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:22:37 +0200

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello, 

the attached file add packages for scotch and pt-scotch that install shared libraries for both of them.

[0001-PATCH-Add-scotch-pt-scotch-with-shared-libraries.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #10 received at 47619-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
To: Franck Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>
Cc: 47619-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [bug#47619] [PATCH] add
 pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared
Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:54:49 -0400

On Tue, Apr 06, 2021 at 01:22:37PM +0200, Franck Pérignon wrote:
> Hello, 
> 
> the attached file add packages for scotch and pt-scotch that install shared libraries for both of them.

Thanks! I shortened the synopsis of pt-scotch-shared, to satisfy `guix
lint`, and pushed as 5fd046cbfd73ac178c02c503f3d8e2104a929e52.

Message #13 received at 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Franck Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>
Cc: 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eric Bavier <bavier <at> member.fsf.org>,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#47619: [PATCH] add
 pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared
Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2021 09:21:45 +0200

Hello,

Franck Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr> skribis:

> +(define-public scotch-shared
> +  (package (inherit scotch)
> +    (name "scotch-shared")
> +    (native-inputs
> +     `(("gcc" ,gcc)
> +       ("flex" ,flex)
> +       ("bison" ,bison)))
> +    (arguments
> +     (substitute-keyword-arguments (package-arguments scotch)
> +       ((#:phases scotch-shared-phases)
> +        `(modify-phases ,scotch-shared-phases

Thanks for the packages, Franck!

I was wondering whether we should provide exclusively shared libraries,
as we do for other packages, instead of keeping ‘scotch’ and
‘scotch-shared’.  Thoughts?

(If we do keep both, the naming convention so far is the opposite: ‘foo’
and ‘foo-static’.)

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Message #16 received at 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eric Bavier <bavier <at> posteo.net>
To: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>, Franck
 Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>
Cc: 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eric Bavier <bavier <at> member.fsf.org>,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#47619: [PATCH] add
 pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 22:24:26 -0500

On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 09:21 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Hello,
> I was wondering whether we should provide exclusively shared libraries,
> as we do for other packages, instead of keeping ‘scotch’ and
> ‘scotch-shared’.  Thoughts?

I know in the past many in the HPC realm have wanted to have static
libraries available, to avoid the costs associated with start-up
linking and global function table indirection.

Some current developments, such as some HPC system vendors moving to
support only shared libraries on future systems, suggests that this
preference might be waning.

my 2-cents,
`~Eric

Message #19 received at 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Ludovic Courtès <ludo <at> gnu.org>
To: Eric Bavier <bavier <at> posteo.net>
Cc: Franck Pérignon <Franck.Perignon <at> univ-grenoble-alpes.fr>,
 Eric Bavier <bavier <at> member.fsf.org>, 47619 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 Leo Famulari <leo <at> famulari.name>
Subject: Re: bug#47619: [PATCH] add
 pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2021 11:59:48 +0200

Hi,

Eric Bavier <bavier <at> posteo.net> skribis:

> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 09:21 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I was wondering whether we should provide exclusively shared libraries,
>> as we do for other packages, instead of keeping ‘scotch’ and
>> ‘scotch-shared’.  Thoughts?
>
> I know in the past many in the HPC realm have wanted to have static
> libraries available, to avoid the costs associated with start-up
> linking and global function table indirection.
>
> Some current developments, such as some HPC system vendors moving to
> support only shared libraries on future systems, suggests that this
> preference might be waning.

Yeah, I doubt this preference is justified, I feel it’s more one of
these cultural things.  But yeah, let’s keep both for now.

Would it make sense to rename “scotch” to “scotch-static” and
“scotch-shared” to “scotch”, for consistency?

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.