Skip to content

Adding general way to handle filtered deps when installing software #1095

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

Conversation

Crivella
Copy link
Contributor

@Crivella Crivella commented May 27, 2025

Right now every time a software that relies on calling get_software_root for a filtered deps is called requires and ad-hoc fix via an hook.

This is a proposed way to automatically point the respective $EBROOT... variable to the compat layer for every filtered deps.

TODO / Ideas

  • Would need also to remove the customization done in other hooks
  • Possibly recognize only deps filtered specifically by EESSI instead of relying on `build_option('filter_deps')
  • Alternatively or together to previous point, implement better logic for filter_deps as in framework
  • Could/Should this be performed at an earlier step the pre_configure?

@Crivella
Copy link
Contributor Author

Crivella commented Jun 5, 2025

Beside the new LLVM hook #1093 this behavior seems to be present only in the Score-P and Extrae hooks that need the location of binutils.

The structure of the binutils installation in the compat layer is different from a normal Easybuild ones

  • $EPREFIX/usr/lib*/binutils/-linux-gnu/2./
    • library files
    • include/
      • headers

VS

  • $EBROOT/
    • lib/
      • library files
    • include/
      • headers

This would probably require having a way to deal with different folder structure in the EBlocks and setting the variables in a dedicated way for every filtered deps

EG since Score-P Easyblock relies on get_software_libdir to find the libraries (by searching in lib and lib64 inside of get_software_root the current solution would not be able to work

@boegel
Copy link
Contributor

boegel commented Jun 5, 2025

This is a pretty big hammer, I would rather see us handle this case by case, as is being done in #1093

@Crivella Crivella closed this Jun 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants