Re: ITP: mpi-defaults -- Meta-packages depending on appropriate MPI -dev and -bin packages for each platform

Dirk Eddelbuettel <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.debian.science,gmane.linux.debian.devel.general,gmane.linux.debian.devel.beowulf
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 19 November 2008 at 09:40, Adam C Powell IV wrote:
| Package: wnpp
| Severity: wishlist
| 
| Package name: mpi-defaults
| Version: 0.1 
| Author: Debian Science Team <[email protected]>
| License: Undetermined
| 
| This new source package will produce two binary meta-packages:
| default-mpi-dev and default-mpi-bin which depend on libopenmpi-dev and
| openmpi-bin respectively on the platforms where they are available, and
| lam4-dev and lam-runtime on the others.  A third default-mpi-dbg might
| also depend on libopenmpi-dbg, though there is no corresponding lam
| package.
| 
| Background:
| http://lists.debian.org/debian-science/2008/10/msg00097.html 

Good stuff!   The only question I have is with respect to the naming.  We
sometimes call preferences 'sensible-$FOO'.    I don't really like

	  default-mpi-{dev,mpi}

because is stresses 'default' as the first word. Apt-get search reveals that
we have exactly one precedent in default-java-*. 

I think we should put either debian or mpi first. How about 

          mpi-default-{dev,bin}

or even

          mpi-debian-default-{dev,bin}

to make it even clearer that it is just 'us' (ie Debian) defining a default
for us, rather misconstruing that more than two decades (I'm guessing) of
competing mpi implementations have ended ? ;-)

Comments ?

Dirk

-- 
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.