https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Susi Lehtola changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks|505154 (FE-SCITECH) |
Referenced Bugs:
https://bugzilla.r
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Bug 1350257 depends on bug 1382916, which changed state.
Bug 1382916 Summary: 64-bit interface version of openblas is not using 64-bit
integers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382916
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #59 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc25 has been pushed to the Fedora 25 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #58 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 stable repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on th
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ON_QA |CLOSED
Resolution|---
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Bug 1350257 depends on bug 1382916, which changed state.
Bug 1382916 Summary: 64-bit interface version of openblas is not using 64-bit
integers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382916
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #56 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc24 has been pushed to the Fedora 24 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #55 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc23 has been pushed to the Fedora 23 testing repository. If
problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|MODIFIED|ON_QA
--- Comment #54 from Fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Fedora Update System changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |MODIFIED
--
You are receiving
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #52 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc25 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 25.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-8fb059d3f1
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #53 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc24 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 24.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-fd925b5d70
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #51 from Fedora Update System ---
petsc-3.7.4-12.fc23 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 23.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-185beddccc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Bug 1350257 depends on bug 1382916, which changed state.
Bug 1382916 Summary: 64-bit interface version of openblas is not using 64-bit
integers
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1382916
What|Removed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #50 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #48)
> If i'm not wrong, superlu_dist needs 'parmetis' that is not distributed
> under open license.
There is a scotch substitute for enough of it (ptscotchparmetis)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #49 from Jon Ciesla ---
Package request has been approved:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/package/rpms/petsc
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #48 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #46)
> I hadn't spotted the condition excluding powerpc generally. That should
> only be on el6. I'll approve it if you'll fix that, but I've just realized
> the rev
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Dave Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||fedora-review+
--- Comment #47 from Dave
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Dave Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
Assignee|nob...@fedoraproject.org|d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk
--- Comment #46 fr
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #45 from Antonio Trande ---
- Install missing header files
SPEC:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/sagitter/petsc/petsc.git/plain/petsc.spec?id=10472ac8bd2a12d68a92190acd6aa967e6a2ff11
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fed
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #44 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #43).
>
> I'm still interested in the optimization, though. I'd at least expect
> vectorization to be worthwhile, even if it only uses sse2 in this case, but
> I don
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #43 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #42)
> (In reply to Dave Love from comment #41)
> > I still don't understand why the environment module is needed.
>
> And i still don't understand of what env module
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #42 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #41)
> I still don't understand why the environment module is needed.
And i still don't understand of what env module you are talking.. :)
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #41 from Dave Love ---
I still don't understand why the environment module is needed.
Why has it reverted to using -O2?
gmp is linked, but apparently never referenced, so presumably it can be
dropped.
--
You are receiving this
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #40 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #38)
> (In reply to Dave Love from comment #37)
> > (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #36)
> > > PETSc needs fftw-mpi libraries; it does not work with fft
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #39 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Orion Poplawski from comment #38)
> fftw with mpi support:
> https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2016-ae8fc16aac
Thanks. (I was going to suggest an update for relevant changes in 3.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #38 from Orion Poplawski ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #37)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #36)
> > PETSc needs fftw-mpi libraries; it does not work with fftw actually
> > available on Fedora/EPEL.
>
> OK, so
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #37 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #36)
> PETSc needs fftw-mpi libraries; it does not work with fftw actually
> available on Fedora/EPEL.
OK, so we should get rid of that (and chase the change for fftw
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Depends On||1382916
Referenced Bugs:
https://b
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #36 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #35)
> The fact that the check behaves differently in local mock, koji, and copr
> suggests a real problem with undefined behaviour, which I think we should
> worry ab
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #35 from Dave Love ---
The fact that the check behaves differently in local mock, koji, and copr
suggests a real problem with undefined behaviour, which I think we should worry
about; I don't have time to debug it. Maybe orion has
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #34 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #33)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #31)
> > Sorry, I have already updated to 3.7.3
>
> I'll check it a.s.a.p.
>
> > > [!]: %check is present and all tes
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #33 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #31)
> Sorry, I have already updated to 3.7.3
I'll check it a.s.a.p.
> > [!]: %check is present and all tests pass.
> >
> > Not run -- why not? (I thought they wer
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Dave Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags|needinfo?(d.love@liverpool. |
|ac.uk)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #31 from Antonio Trande ---
Sorry, I have already updated to 3.7.3
SPEC:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/sagitter/petsc/petsc.git/plain/petsc.spec?id=ea9cded7030999e4f51dde529cae5647e5cc5173
SRPM:
https://copr-be.c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Orion Poplawski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||or...@cora.nwra.com
--- Comment #30
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #29 from Dave Love ---
Apologies for the delay due to other commitments. I eventually managed to run
fedora-review and look at the results, though only on f24 as rawhide, which the
guidelines specify, seems to have a bug preventin
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Flags||needinfo?(d.love@liverpool.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #28 from Antonio Trande ---
> In what version of Fedora?
Fedora 24.
> Anyhow, if it breaks the build, it's a good excuse to not to use the default
> rpm flags but the ones that configure would supply, as I was going to suggest
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #27 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #26)
> >%configure CFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS CXXFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS FCFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS
> > FFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS \
>
> Line above is a legacy of older
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #26 from Antonio Trande ---
>%configure CFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS CXXFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS FCFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS
> FFLAGS=$SETOPT_FLAGS LDFLAGS=$LDFLAGS \
Line above is a legacy of older configuration, it's a mistake.
Fixing it, i obtai
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #25 from Dave Love ---
I'm still trying to get fedora-review run properly on the current version.
It's now failing for a different reason that looks like a Fedora bug...
In the meantime, something that needs investigating is that
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #24 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #23)
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #22)
> > > I don't think the /usr/share/petsc*/conf directories should be in the
> > > main packages (or even in the -d
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #23 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #22)
> > I don't think the /usr/share/petsc*/conf directories should be in the
> > main packages (or even in the -devel ones?)
> >
>
> Do you think that modules and
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #22 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #21)
> Apologies for the delay, what with being away, and having to spend a
> lot more time on this than I expected.
>
> (In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #20)
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #21 from Dave Love ---
Apologies for the delay, what with being away, and having to spend a
lot more time on this than I expected.
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #20)
> SPEC:
> http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/c
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #20 from Antonio Trande ---
SPEC:
http://copr-dist-git.fedorainfracloud.org/cgit/sagitter/petsc/petsc.git/plain/petsc.spec?id=79c67a625efcd1f39a24705c8ce881977f2bb0b1
SRPM:
https://copr-be.cloud.fedoraproject.org/results/sagitter/
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #19 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #18)
> Is this patch for epel6 only?
It's not relevant for epel6 because that doesn't have a recent enough cgns
(which needs to be conditionalized out).
> With cgns,
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #18 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #12)
>
> I'd forgotten that I had a more recent cgns installed; the epel6
> version won't work, and needs to be conditionalized out. I also found
> it needed a patch
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #17 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to Antonio Trande from comment #16)
> What do you mean with "%() stuff"?
--known-endian=%(%{__python2} -c "import sys;print sys.byteorder") \
> > What is the SETOPT_FLAGS=... business about? It
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #16 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #12)
> OK, I've now spent some time looking at this and building it; sorry for the
> delay.
>
> The %() stuff needs removing. It can only work for things in the
> bu
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #15 from Dave Love ---
(In reply to benson_muite from comment #11)
> OpenBLAS or ATLAS would be nice.
ATLAS, at least as packaged, is a factor of several slower for dgemm on recent
x86. (I don't know how much use petsc actually
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #14 from Dave Love ---
Oops. openblas should be conditional on
%ifarch %{ix86} x86_64 armv7hl ppc64le
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this pro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #13 from Dave Love ---
Created attachment 1193550
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1193550&action=edit
cgns fix
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notifie
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #12 from Dave Love ---
OK, I've now spent some time looking at this and building it; sorry for the
delay.
The %() stuff needs removing. It can only work for things in the
build root, and it's not necessary -- you can see errors i
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
benson_mu...@emailplus.org changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||benson_mu...@emailplus.org
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #10 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #9)
> Sorry for the delay. I think this needs more work than I realized and I
> need to look at it further and check local builds. Some immediate comments
> from the
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #9 from Dave Love ---
Sorry for the delay. I think this needs more work than I realized and I need
to look at it further and check local builds. Some immediate comments from the
last go:
* I doubt think pkg-config is needed, eve
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #8 from Antonio Trande ---
(In reply to Dave Love from comment #6)
> I had trouble running the review tool as I have to use a VM, and the build
> takes a lot of memory, but there are some problems and queries I have with
> the spec
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #7 from Dave Love ---
Oh, something else. PAPI is a mess on el6. You need to ensure you get v5 for
at least sandybridge+. This is what I had to do for scorep:
# The messing with linkage paths here and below is due to the mess o
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #5 from Antonio Trande ---
>There are some components that could be added: at least scotch
I don't see any configure option to pass libscotch to petsc, just
--with-ptscotch that requires --with-mpi.
> Is there any harm in linking
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #4 from Dave Love ---
Created attachment 1185140
--> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1185140&action=edit
el6 support
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notif
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Dave Love changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||d.l...@liverpool.ac.uk
--- Comment #3 fro
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
--- Comment #2 from Antonio Trande ---
Spec URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/petsc/petsc.spec
SRPM URL: https://sagitter.fedorapeople.org/petsc/petsc-3.7.2-6.fc24.src.rpm
- Packed additional header files
- Tests performed on EPEL7
--
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Whiteboard|NotReady|
--- Comment #1 from Antonio Trande
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1350257
Antonio Trande changed:
What|Removed |Added
Blocks||505154 (FE-SCITECH)
Whiteboard
66 matches
Mail list logo
