-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 704
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
added missing space in 'configopts' in ParaView 5.8.0 easyconfigs using 2020a toolchain #10989
Conversation
@boegel, you missed something there ;) The current recipe results in |
@mboisson Ouch... Any idea if we can catch this by enhancing the sanity check? |
Test report by @boegel |
Test report by @smoors |
Mmmm, so, are those failing tests just a symptoms of the corrected recipe not working, and the incorrect recipe skipping something ? |
this is the error for the intel version (foss builds fine). looks indeed like an issue with OSMesa linking, which was skipped previously.
|
|
ah yes, I knew that.. |
actually, I get this error when building with GCC as well, and even if I use Gentoo's Looks like a ParaView bug to me. |
I created an issue on kitware's gitlab... lets see what they say : |
I'm here to complicate the situation a bit more: #10977 So, I really really really want a version that works with VirtualGL, which will not work if linked with OSMesa. Then, introduce secondary packages for
respectively for all your off-screen rendering needs. Probably these versions could just build the pvserver components since this is their usecase. Since the ParaView we released in the last EB didn't actually build with OSMesa correctly, perhaps we can consider removing it from this PR, and then opening new PRs for a |
I think these recipes actually address what you want to do : We build three flavors of ParaView. One which builds the client, with Qt and Mesa, one which builds fo offscreen rendering with OSMesa, and one which uses EGL from NVidia to work on GPUs. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have no strong opinion on any of the other differences, like OSPray and whatnot. But, I would suggest we at least do this.
easybuild/easyconfigs/p/ParaView/ParaView-5.8.0-foss-2020a-Python-3.8.2-mpi.eb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
easybuild/easyconfigs/p/ParaView/ParaView-5.8.0-intel-2020a-Python-3.8.2-mpi.eb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
I'm happy with dropping What does enabling |
easybuild/easyconfigs/p/ParaView/ParaView-5.8.0-foss-2020a-Python-3.8.2-mpi.eb
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
There are basically 3 modes, all, sort-of-mutually-exclusive, rendering backends:
(all 3 of them make use of Mesa) |
@Micket So that means picking between a Don't you basically need both onscreen and offscreen rendering when using Paraview as a dep for OpenFOAM? Should the Paraview that has good support for on screen rendering be tagged with |
@boegel Yes, it means picking. See ComputeCanada's easyconfigs above in @mboisson comments, where they offer all 3 flavours. OpenFOAM build their own "parafoam" (instead of just writing a custom file format/file-reader plugin, they compile their own paraview 🤡 ) for post-processing. Some of the versions need to be tagged, yes. My suggestion above was to rather tag the off-screen versions, like ComputeCanada does, though I'm not sure whether it's good to label it "offscreen-gpu" because, technically, EGL supports software rendering as well (though currently one needs to specify extra environment varialbes to coax it into doing so at runtime #10977 (comment) ) But, I don't really care what versionsuffixes. EGL support for VirtualGL is getting closer and closer, and with some simple patches to VTK, it should definitely be possible for EGL to superseed everything; onscreen and offscreen, gpu and software rendering, so, eventually we could just have 1 golden version again. |
In general we instruct direct users of paraview to install its client on their own laptop/workstation/desktop/whatever and then use the server, on the cluster which then will either use a GPU or software rendering, see https://docs.computecanada.ca/wiki/ParaView For the rest I agree with @Micket here. For us running paraview via virtualgl is a secondary use case but that's just a local detail. |
No matter what we do, we need to have Mesa as a dependency. Mesa supplies the libraries for all 3 possible backends (good old GLX, the obscure "OSMESA" and the new-fangled EGL). I suggest we
(I have no particular strong feelings about what the suffix should be, just something along these lines) |
These would fit exactly what we do in Compute Canada, so I'm fine with those. For information, these are what we have installed: |
If there aren't any objections, then I suggest we do this suggested change (which is what we were implicitly already doing here due to the typo) #10989 (review) ? |
Agreed. @mboisson Can you also remove the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
@boegelbot please test @ generoso |
@boegel: Request for testing this PR well received on generoso PR test command '
Test results coming soon (I hope)... - notification for comment with ID 756862528 processed Message to humans: this is just bookkeeping information for me, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
Test report by @boegelbot |
Test report by @boegel |
Going in, thanks @mboisson! |
Test report by @boegel |
There's a missing space at the end of one line of
configopts
, which means that CMake options get ignored.