[mpich-discuss] Question on the Centos/RH binaries for 1.2.1

[Pavan Balaji]

You should use the "el" version; "fc" is for Fedora core. I believe
you'll need 1.2.1/2.el5/x86_64 for your system.

But, can't you add an EPEL repo to Internet package install sources, and
do a yum install or equivalent to install mpich2? That'll automatically
check for dependencies, which makes it much easier.

 -- Pavan

On 12/15/2009 01:25 PM, Hiatt, Dave M wrote:
> If I may, I have a question.  I am a neophyte in terms of Linux, just setting up my first Linux node.  I have many Windows x64 XP nodes running.  But I am in great need to get a binary up and running on the Centos equivalent of RH 5.3.
> 
> I followed the URL's on the site but I don' t really understand the nomenclature for the releases.  I took the "el" to mean Enterprise editions, and the "fc" to mean the standard releases.  I have so far one box built up for Linux on the Centos RH 5.3 equivalent.  I am running x64.  I picked the 1.2.1 release version, and followed that, but do not have the Linux knowledge to decipher what the 1.; 2.; 3. meanings are and what fc1x implies.  I downloaded 1.fc13, 2.fc13, and 3.fc13 thinking they are related and should be installed in that order.  Is that correct?  Could you educate me.  Sorry for my ignorance.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> "Consequences, Schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich". - Daffy Duck
> Dave Hiatt
> Market Risk Systems Integration
> CitiMortgage, Inc.
> 1000 Technology Dr.
> Third Floor East, M.S. 55
> O'Fallon, MO 63368-2240
> 
> Phone:  636-261-1408
> Mobile: 314-452-9165
> FAX:    636-261-1312
> Email:     Dave.M.Hiatt at citigroup.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mpich-discuss mailing list
> mpich-discuss at mcs.anl.gov
> https://lists.mcs.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/mpich-discuss

-- 
Pavan Balaji
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~balaji