Update to easyblocks to add lfoss toolchain support [SCOTCH/MUMPS]#4069
Open
hattom wants to merge 2 commits intoeasybuilders:developfrom
Open
Update to easyblocks to add lfoss toolchain support [SCOTCH/MUMPS]#4069hattom wants to merge 2 commits intoeasybuilders:developfrom
hattom wants to merge 2 commits intoeasybuilders:developfrom
Conversation
Author
|
A generalization to support also NVHPC is left as a future exercise, but would presumably follow exactly the same pattern. |
Author
|
btw -- I'm working my way through to get PETSc building. These are the problems that I've found so far, but I'm not finished yet (building python etc is taking a very long time). |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
SCOTCH's Easyblock had two sections which explicitly depended on the toolchain:
The first was for the name of the Makefile:
The other was for the restrict keyword:
For both cases, add LLVM to the GCC behaviour, and modify the syntax to match in both cases (compiler order, raise if
else, define acomp_famvariable)