On Tue, 9 Mar 2004, Jeremy Enos wrote:
> >switcher uses the unicos modules as the back-end. switcher-reload is
> >simply an alias to "module unload switcher; module load switcher".
>
> Ah... so unloading and loading the switcher module will remove the
> current mpi module and then add the statically defined one to my env?
Er... sort of. Unloading switcher will forcibly unload all the modules
that switcher originally loaded. Then loading switcher will load all the
modules that your current switcher settings say that you should have
loaded. (it actually took quite a bit of figuring out and some wicked
tricks to make "module unload switcher; module load switcher" to do this
:-).
The "switcher" command is all about changing file settings.
The "switcher-reload" command is all about changing your environment.
Mixing the two -- while possible -- would take a lot of work (the whole
"changing file settings" stuff would have to be pushed back 2-3 levels of
abstraction and effectively do everything by remote control. It gets
unbelieveably icky).
> If so, this would explain why one command would be extra complicated to
> implement, and I'd understand that. I was thinking that the other
> modules existed independently of switcher itself and were merely managed
> by it.
Um... they are. I think we're mixing terms and definitions here...
Keep in mind: you can *always* manually use modules to load/unload modules
(including switcher). So you *could* do:
-----
shell$ module load mpi/lam-7.0
-----
and it would do the same thing as if you did (for example):
-----
shell$ switcher mpi = lam-7.0
shell$ switcher-reload
-----
with the disclaimer that the former will not last beyond the current shell
invocation.
Remember that switcher is just a layer on top of Unicos modules. The
whole point of switcher is a persistence layer, letting both system-wide
and your personal module-related settings persist from one shell
invocation to the next.
Also remember that 95% of the users will never see/use/hear of modules;
their only interaction will be with switcher itself. But switcher was
very carefully designed such that power users (like me :-) can use modules
directly if they want to.
Modules really rock. Almost as much as subversion! ;-)
> >Wow. Thanks for those words of praise.
>
> They're not critical words... at least not destructively. I just want
> to have a clear understanding of the details of why OSCAR [or switcher]
> doesn't do something before I prescribe a big fat RTFM to a user.
> Information armament, if you will.
<public appology>
Sorry, I just had a heck of a day and you pushed a button, whether you
intended to or not. ;-)
</public appology>
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials
Free Linux tutorial presented by Daniel Robbins, President and CEO of
GenToo technologies. Learn everything from fundamentals to system
administration.http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1470&alloc_id=3638&op=click
_______________________________________________
Oscar-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oscar-devel
