Marcin Dulak píše v Ne 23. 04. 2017 v 15:13 +0200: > > > On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Ondřej Vašík <ovasik at redhat.com> > wrote: > Hi, > > I would like to propose start of High performance computing > (HPC) SIG. I > see it already mentioned on > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup > among Future SIGs. Primary reason for the SIG existence will > be to > improve the state of High performance computing related > packages on > CentOS and similar distributions, with special focus on > stability of > builds, CentOS (and similar distribution) related improvements > for > OpenHPC project and getting new HPC packages packaged for > CentOS and/or > Fedora. > > > Good to see an initiative to get the tools specific for HPC packaged, > but I have a comment. > Under https://github.com/openhpc/ohpc/tree/obs/OpenHPC_1.3_Factory/components/io-libs I see spec files for software like netcdf or hdf5. > > > On a cluster one needs access to **many** versions of libraries (that > includes compilers, python, mpi, etc.) and > packaging them as RPMS is not the correct model, unless the HPC system > uses VM golden images or container images, and allows the users to > start them on-demand. > What is usually used is a setup based on lmod/environment-modules like > https://github.com/hpcugent/easybuild-easyconfigs Yes, understood, thanks for the comment. With containers being more and more popular, I think even packaging these applications and libraries makes more sense. Of course, optimizing build for the specific system would be even better, but package still gives you a way how to easily install/update/remove some application with all its dependencies. For many versions of libs and compilers - sometimes it may make sense to create a matrix of rpms like is done in the case of openHPC initiative, sometimes probably software collections can be used to get multiple versions of library/dependency on the system in parallel. Goal is not to solve everything - this is of course out of scope - but to improve current situation and maybe to start discussion like this - how to proceed, what is missing and what is expected to be missing (because it doesn't make sense to have it as distribution package). Regards, Ondrej > > > I would therefore prefer the OpenHPC project focuses in the first > place on the tools a single version of which is installed on the > operating system. > > > Best regards, > > > Marcin > > > Initial members would be me (ovasik at redhat.com, CentOS FAS > account: > Reset), Adrian Reber (areber at redhat.com, CentOS FAS account: > areber), > Stanislav Kozina (skozina at redhat.com, CentOS FAS account: > ersin) > and Jan Chaloupka (jchaloup at fedoraproject.org, CentOS FAS > account: > jchaloup). Of course, anyone is welcome to join. > > Thanks in advance for approving/sponsoring the SIG. > > Regards, > Ondrej Vasik > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS-devel mailing list > CentOS-devel at centos.org > https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel