'spack compiler add' can directly register spack installed compilers #7868
Conversation
|
I marked the PR
To what concerns us at EPFL, I'll use this small PR to simplify a bit the CI scripts for deployment (and move logic from a shell script that was driving Spack into Spack itself). |
| supported = spack.compilers.supported_compilers() + ['llvm'] | ||
| not_compilers = [x for x in specs if x.abstract.name not in supported] | ||
| if not_compilers: | ||
| msg = 'these packages are not compilers [{0}]' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe make that "spack-supported compilers"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we decide to continue with this PR, it's probably worth to mark in some way the packages that provide a compiler (a compiler tag?) and rely on that for the check above. Currently, for instance, flang and intel-parallel-studio are not accounted as specs that provide a compiler.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The question is more what are we talking about long-term wise. Will compilers become "normal" build dependencies? Then I'd put here a "spack-supported" tag as this is really all it will amount to. If compilers will remain a thing, then we need to have a larger discussions on what constitutes a compiler that is recognised by spack (i.e. there are other languages besides C/C++ and Fortran that are compiled, do they get their own compiler support?)
I really don't have the knowledge to offer a well founded opinion, but it feels like wack a mole to keep up with all possible compilers. And (at least from my well of ignorance) there isn't much difference between py-setuptools and gcc, as in both modify the installed package and therefore (sometimes) need to be consistent within a runtime environment.
| tty.msg(msg.format(item.request)) | ||
| install(item.request, echo=True) | ||
| elif not_installed: | ||
| msg = 'the following specs need to be installed first [{0}]' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add something like "or provide --install-missing"
| for item in not_installed: | ||
| msg = "Installing missing spec for '{0}' (might take a while)" | ||
| tty.msg(msg.format(item.request)) | ||
| install(item.request, echo=True) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not too familiar with this part of spack, but what does echo do?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It tells a SpackCommand to echo the output to stdout (by default the output is not echoed, but only captured in a StringIO and returned to the caller as a string).
The command line interface for `spack compiler add` has been extended with an additional flag (--spec SPEC) that adds the prefix of SPEC to the search paths when registering a compiler. The logic is such that a basic check is performed to ensure that the specified spec is that of a compiler. By default the compiler must be already installed but, if the `--install-missing` flag is passed, it will be bootstrapped.
alalazo
force-pushed
the
features/register_spack_installed_compilers
branch
from
85e90c3
to
bb9fdcd
Compare
|
Superseded by #10761 |
The command line interface for
spack compiler addhas been extended with an additional flag that adds the prefix of specs to the search paths when registering a compiler.The logic is such that a basic check is performed to ensure that the specified spec is that of a compiler. By default the compiler must be already installed but, if the
--install-missingflag is passed, it will be bootstrapped.Examples