dolfin team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 03:38:18PM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>
>
> Anders Logg wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 04:29:24PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
> >> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 01:23:33PM +0100, Johannes Ring wrote:
> >>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 12:49 PM, Harish Narayanan
> >>> <harish.mlists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>> On 2/16/10 10:27 AM, Johannes Ring wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:37 AM, Harish Narayanan
> >>>>> <harish.mlists@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>> On 2/16/10 9:06 AM, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 08:42:55AM +0000, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 09:09:31AM +0100, Johannes Ring wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 6:06 PM, Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 15, 2010 at 03:49:05PM +0100, Anders Logg wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   UFL    0.5.2
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   FErari 0.2.0
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   FFC    0.9.1
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now released.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   Instant 0.9.8: Why is the buildbot failing?
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Now released.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   DOLFIN  0.9.7: SCOTCH problems
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Remains to fix:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>  - Drop Hardy support (upgrade buildbots)
> >>>>>>>>>>> This might take some time, at least for linux64-exp since I have no
> >>>>>>>>>>> control over this. I guess it will be upgraded when Lucid is out.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What should we install on hardy-i386? Karmic or perhaps Lucid?
> >>>>>>>>>> I think we should choose the simplest option. I don't know what is
> >>>>>>>>>> easiest and fastest, either dropping Hardy support (which requires
> >>>>>>>>>> upgrades of buildbots and some extra administration) or adding the
> >>>>>>>>>> required #ifdefs for unordered_set/set. Garth?
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I don't want to add ifdefs (it actually involves more than just that).
> >>>>>>>>> Harish told me yesterday that he wasn't using the standard OSX gcc (his
> >>>>>>>>> old version didn't support tr1 well), which means we could probably
> >>>>>>>>> switch back to using the tr1 unordered containers and not break Hardy or
> >>>>>>>>> standard standard OSX installations.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I would still suggest that we drop Hardy in the near future, perhaps
> >>>>>>>>> once Lucid is out.
> >>>>>>>> That seems like a good plan since Lucid is the next LTS release.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Do you know which #ifdefs to add so we can get the buildbot green?
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> No ifdefs. Just change
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>   boost::unordered_set -> std::tr1::unordered_set
> >>>>>>>   boost::unordered_map -> std::tr1::unordered_map
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> and the relevant includes.
> >>>>>> This should work, except it might break the mac buildbot. While I wasn't
> >>>>>> using the most recent OS X or gcc, I think I was in line with the mac
> >>>>>> buildbot.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Johannes, what does the buildbot run? Leopard or Snow Leopard, and what
> >>>>>> gcc does it use?
> >>>>> I think it was Leopard and gcc 4.3 from fink. However, the mac
> >>>>> buildbot has been offline for some weeks now. We have bought a new
> >>>>> imac to be used as a dedicated mac buildbot but I haven't started to
> >>>>> install anything on it yet. I'm not sure if we should go for fink or
> >>>>> macports. Any recommendations?
> >>>> I suggest MacPorts. It is a bit more unstable than fink, but it allows
> >>>> for greater control and has a very recent collection of packages.
> >>> Thanks, I will look at MacPorts when I setup the new buildbot.
> >>>
> >>> Johannes
> >> So is the conclusion that std::tr1::unordered_set will work with
> >>
> >>   1. Modern operating systems
> >>   2. Ubuntu Hardy
> >>   3. New Mac versions (which is what we will run on the buildbot)
> >>
> >> ?
> >>
> >> If so I (or someone else) can switch to std::tr1::unordered_set.
> >
> > And the scotch/parmetis include thing needs to be fixed. Garth?
> >
>
> I can take a look tonight, although I haven't followed closely what the
> problem is.

Great. There seems to be a conflict between two versions of
parmetis.h, the ParMETIS one and another installed by SCOTCH.

I think the solution is to add a scotch/ prefix in the #include
and modify the include path accordingly so it doesn't pick up
parmetis.h from SCOTCH when the real one is needed.

--
Anders

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature