Thanks!
If you want to volunteer to rewrite our CMake files, I wouldn't fight you :)
I'll let you know when I get it working!
Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andy Bauer" <andy.ba...@kitware.com>
To: "tim gallagher" <tim.gallag...@gatech.edu>
Cc: "paraview" <paraview@paraview.org>, "Chuck Atkins"
<chuck.atk...@kitware.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 11:44:28 AM
Subject: Re: [Paraview] [Non-DoD Source] Building on Cray systems
Hi Tim,
Yep, you did update the list a while ago. I just wanted to make sure you
weren't stuck on something that I could potentially help with.
Good luck!
Andy
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:28 AM, Tim Gallagher < tim.gallag...@gatech.edu >
wrote:
Hi Andy,
Sorry, I thought I updated the list awhile ago!
Using the scripts that Richard provided, I was able to build on Copper and
could run the FEM coprocessing demo. But I got stuck trying to get our code to
link against it. Our code is set up using the Catamount toolchain file and so
things like dynamic linking don't work with the way we have been doing our
build. So, I need to try and figure out how to change our build system setup to
get everything to work properly. It doesn't work if we just stop using the
toolchain.
I haven't figured that bit out yet; it's on my todo list. But I was able to get
PV to build with Richard's script.
I also could not get the script that comes with the superbuild to work either,
but did not dig into it because I had something that did work.
Tim
From: "Andy Bauer" < andy.ba...@kitware.com >
To: "Chuck Atkins" < chuck.atk...@kitware.com >
Cc: "tim gallagher" < tim.gallag...@gatech.edu >, "paraview" <
paraview@paraview.org >
Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2016 11:21:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Paraview] [Non-DoD Source] Building on Cray systems
Hi Tim,
Were you able to get Catalyst built on any of those machines? I briefly tried
on Copper and Garnet with the superbuild but hit some failure that I didn't
investigate further.
Best,
Andy
On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Chuck Atkins < chuck.atk...@kitware.com >
wrote:
<blockquote>
Hi Tim,
When building CMake on a Cray, you'll want to build using the host system
compilers, i.e. /usr/bin/gcc and /usr/bin/g++, not with the cray compiler
wrappers. Usually I just do:
module purge
CC=/usr/bin/gcc CXX=/usr/bin/g++ /path/to/cmake_source/bootstrap
--prefix=/path/to/cmake/install --parallel=8
make -j8 install
The resulting CMake binary can then run on either the login nodes or compute
nodes and target anything that CMake supports. I would also suggest building
CMake from either the latest git master branch or the current 3.5 release
candidate. I've added a new platform file for the Cray Linux Environment that
knows how to introspect the compiler wrappers, correctly deal with static /
shared, etc, not currently available in the 3.4 release. You can use it by
loading your appropriate PrgEnv module setting
CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME=CrayLinuxEnvironment or using a toolchain file like this:
# The name of the target operating system
set(CMAKE_SYSTEM_NAME CrayLinuxEnvironment) # This handles all the oddball Cray
stuff
if(DEFINED ENV{ASYNCPE_DIR}) # Older Cray programming environment
set(COMP_DIR $ENV{ASYNCPE_DIR})
elseif(DEFINED ENV{CRAYPE_DIR}) # Newer Cray programming environment
set(COMP_DIR $ENV{CRAYPE_DIR})
else()
message(FATAL_ERROR "Unable to determine compiler dir")
endif()
# Set the compilers
set(CMAKE_C_COMPILER ${COMP_DIR}/bin/cc)
set(CMAKE_CXX_COMPILER ${COMP_DIR}/bin/CC)
set(CMAKE_Fortran_COMPILER ${COMP_DIR}/bin/ftn)
- Chuck
On Fri, Feb 5, 2016 at 5:36 AM, Tim Gallagher < tim.gallag...@gatech.edu >
wrote:
<blockquote>
Sorry if you get this multiple times -- the original was blocked from the PV
list because the output log was too big. I can send the log I referred to
off-list to anybody who is interested.
--------------------------------------------------
Good morning!
Thanks Andy and Richard for the advice.
After banging my head on my keyboard for most of the day yesterday , neither
approach worked on Copper.
For Andy's suggestion of building pv5.0 with the Cray cross compiling script, I
got a bunch of errors towards the end. It looks like many things did build, but
then those errors about an unknown system kicked in and it seemed to all fall
apart. I attached the output log as cray_build_pv5.0.txt
Richard, I tried your setup as well. I initially was trying to avoid the
building CMake step but eventually something in the ParaviewSuperbuild failed
because it said it needed CMake 2.8.11 and Copper only has 2.8.10. So, I took a
step back and tried to build CMake. When I just do what is in your script --
configure and then make -- the build fails quickly because it says it cannot
statically link shared libraries. So I tried to build CMake using the
Catamount.cmake toolchain that we use for our application code as well. The
initial configuration took over an hour, it sits at 95% for a long time going
through the portion where it looks for various headers/features. But eventually
it finishes and I tried to build but that failed. I get:
tgallagh@copper01:~/cmake/build> make
[ 3%] Built target cmsys
[ 4%] Built target cmsys_c
[ 6%] Built target cmzlib
[ 6%] Building C object Utilities/cmcurl/lib/CMakeFiles/cmcurl.dir/strerror.c.o
/u/tgallagh/cmake/cmake/Utilities/cmcurl/lib/strerror.c:32:6: error: #error
"strerror_r MUST be either POSIX, glibc or vxworks-style"
# error "strerror_r MUST be either POSIX, glibc or vxworks-style"
^
make[2]: *** [Utilities/cmcurl/lib/CMakeFiles/cmcurl.dir/strerror.c.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [Utilities/cmcurl/lib/CMakeFiles/cmcurl.dir/all] Error 2
So taking a big step backwards here to look at the big picture -- am I (and our
lab) just using Cray systems in a fundamentally incorrect way? We've always
struggled to get things to build when we never have had issues with SGI/Intel,
BlueGene, or IBM machines (even when they were using PowerPC). We used to have
all these same issues with our CFD code on Cray as well and the only solution
we found was to build all of our codes' libraries statically and drop support
for shared libraries.
I appreciate the help with the scripts. If there's any follow-up advice on what
I'm doing wrong in both/either approach, that would be great.
Thanks,
Tim
_______________________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
_______________________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
_______________________________________________
Powered by www.kitware.com
Visit other Kitware open-source projects at
http://www.kitware.com/opensource/opensource.html
Please keep messages on-topic and check the ParaView Wiki at:
http://paraview.org/Wiki/ParaView
Search the list archives at: http://markmail.org/search/?q=ParaView
Follow this link to subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://public.kitware.com/mailman/listinfo/paraview
