[petsc-maint #38919] Re: stupid, stupid, stupid MPI.py

[Matthew Knepley]

I strongly disagree with this change. I would like to back it out until we
discuss it. The correct
thing to do is use --with-shared FOR ALL shared library build requests. Why
should MPI be
different? There is absolutely no need to multiply the mechanisms here.

This is blowing up a small documentation problem into a big design flaw.

   Matt

On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

>
>    This is the help message that has always been there
>
>    help.addArgument('MPI', '-with-mpi-shared=<bool>',
>     nargs.ArgBool(None, None, 'Try to use shared MPI libraries'))
>
>   Note the word   TRY! How can you TRY to use shared MPI libraries if you
> don't build the shared MPI libraries. TRY means make some effort, if you
> don't make the MPI libraries with shared then your are not trying!
>
>   Feel free to add a new option --with-mpi-shared-test if you want, for
> your weird case; where you want to use shared libraries but don't want to
> build them.
>
>
>   Barry
>
>
> On Dec 13, 2009, at 10:19 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>
>  On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>  So if I pass --with-mpi-shared into MPI.py it TESTS if the MPI libraries
>>> are shared. Fine. But if it is download-mpich IT DOES NOT try to make
>>> shared
>>> libraries for MPICH. It only tries to make shared libraries for MPI if
>>> --with-shared is passed. WTF?
>>>
>>>
>> --with-mpi-shared is a workaround option. Perhaps it should be renamed. It
>> was only put in to avoid the shared library test.
>>
>>
>>   So I change it so that it tries to make mpi shared libraries if
>>> --with-mpi-shared is passed but not also --with-shared. What happens?
>>> "Configuring with shared libraries - but the system/compilers do not
>>> support this." How the hell does it know the system/compilers do not
>>> support
>>> this? So I have to change the code to not reject the --with-mpi-shared
>>> when
>>> using static libraries.
>>>
>>>
>> Wait, don't make that change. --with-mpi-shared should NOT control
>> anything
>> but the test.
>>
>>
>>   Sometimes I just want to delete the whole stinking repository of crud
>>> piled on crap piled on crud. Maybe we need to start having code reviews
>>> instead of shoving random code into random files and hope that sometimes
>>> things might work.
>>>
>>>  Ok, well I shoved some random code in and got it to behave reasonably
>>> for
>>> me, until tomorrow,
>>>
>>>  Barry
>>>
>>> This problem caused my early problem, since it ignored the
>>> --with-mpi-shared option it did not think it needed to rebuild mpich.
>>>
>>>
>> I do not understand this. Can we rollback this change and discuss it?
>>
>>  Matt
>>
>> --
>> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
>> experiments
>> is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments
>> lead.
>> -- Norbert Wiener
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 13, 2009 at 9:36 PM, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>
>>  So if I pass --with-mpi-shared into MPI.py it TESTS if the MPI libraries
>> are shared. Fine. But if it is download-mpich IT DOES NOT try to make shared
>> libraries for MPICH. It only tries to make shared libraries for MPI if
>> --with-shared is passed. WTF?
>>
>> --with-mpi-shared is a workaround option. Perhaps it should be renamed. It
>> was only put in to avoid the shared library test.
>>
>>  So I change it so that it tries to make mpi shared libraries if
>> --with-mpi-shared is passed but not also --with-shared. What happens?
>> "Configuring with shared libraries - but the system/compilers do not
>> support this." How the hell does it know the system/compilers do not support
>> this? So I have to change the code to not reject the --with-mpi-shared when
>> using static libraries.
>>
>> Wait, don't make that change. --with-mpi-shared should NOT control
>> anything but the test.
>>
>>  Sometimes I just want to delete the whole stinking repository of crud
>> piled on crap piled on crud. Maybe we need to start having code reviews
>> instead of shoving random code into random files and hope that sometimes
>> things might work.
>>
>>  Ok, well I shoved some random code in and got it to behave reasonably for
>> me, until tomorrow,
>>
>>  Barry
>>
>> This problem caused my early problem, since it ignored the
>> --with-mpi-shared option it did not think it needed to rebuild mpich.
>>
>> I do not understand this. Can we rollback this change and discuss it?
>>
>>  Matt
>>
>> --
>> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their
>> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their
>> experiments lead.
>> -- Norbert Wiener
>>
>
>


-- 
What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments
is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments
lead.
-- Norbert Wiener
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20091214/07efffb9/attachment.html>