Home > Archive > Fortran > September 2005 > which Linux versions?
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
which Linux versions?
|
|
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-01, 3:57 am |
| Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
opinions of Fortran users.
Sincerely,
Bob Corbett
| |
| Brooks Moses 2005-09-01, 3:57 am |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
I suspect that this is liable to get answers that boil down to "test it
on the one I use", but I'll suggest Debian -- admittedly in part for
that reason. Beyond that, It seems to be a well though-of system among
the sy mins I know and trust, and Stanford University (which I attend
as a grad student) is currently providing its networking-software
packages for Red Hat and Debian.
I would also think that the Stable branch of Debian would be a good
testing target for other reasons. It changes very infrequently, which
makes it easy to keep the testing up-to-date; meanwhile, while
up-to-date on security fixes, it's based on somewhat older versions of
support programs, and probably provides a good way of testing against
some of those while only considering "up to date" systems.
Will the Linux versions of the compilers be provided under the same
educational licenses as the existing Sun compilers?
- Brooks
--
The "bmoses-nospam" address is valid; no unmunging needed.
| |
|
|
| David Ham 2005-09-01, 7:57 am |
| On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 23:22:46 -0700
Brooks Moses <bmoses-nospam@cits1.stanford.edu> wrote:
> robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
>
> I suspect that this is liable to get answers that boil down to "test it
> on the one I use", but I'll suggest Debian -- admittedly in part for
> that reason. Beyond that, It seems to be a well though-of system among
> the symins I know and trust, and Stanford University (which I attend
> as a grad student) is currently providing its networking-software
> packages for Red Hat and Debian.
>
> I would also think that the Stable branch of Debian would be a good
> testing target for other reasons. It changes very infrequently, which
> makes it easy to keep the testing up-to-date; meanwhile, while
> up-to-date on security fixes, it's based on somewhat older versions of
> support programs, and probably provides a good way of testing against
> some of those while only considering "up to date" systems.
A further reason for doing it on debian is that there are a bunch of
debian based distributions out there so if sun resolves all the
packaging and dependency issues on debian they'll probably get knoppix,
ubuntu and the rest for free.
>
> Will the Linux versions of the compilers be provided under the same
> educational licenses as the existing Sun compilers?
>
> - Brooks
>
>
> --
> The "bmoses-nospam" address is valid; no unmunging needed.
| |
| Gordon Sande 2005-09-01, 7:57 am |
| On 2005-09-01 02:31:15 -0300, robert.corbett@sun.com said:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
I would expect that the Linux compatability modes of the various
free/open/netBSDs would be of interest. Or native would be even better.
I notice the BSDs showing up on the compatability lists of more and
more software that one would think of as serious. One tends to forget
that the largest number of installed Unixes are actually MacOsX which
in a BSD at heart.
| |
| p.kinsler@ic.ac.uk 2005-09-01, 6:58 pm |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
Slackware, because it generally avoids all the crazy
of dependency checking other distro's have. It also
doesn't require patched kernels and avoids distro-specific
tweaks. And, as another poster has suggested, because
it's the distro I use.
--
---------------------------------+---------------------------------
Dr. Paul Kinsler
Blackett Laboratory (QOLS) (ph) +44-20-759-47520 (fax) 47714
Imperial College London, Dr.Paul.Kinsler@physics.org
SW7 2BW, United Kingdom. http://www.qols.ph.ic.ac.uk/~kinsle/
| |
| J. F. Cornwall 2005-09-01, 6:58 pm |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
You should ask this over in some of the Linux newsgroups, too. They can
fill you in on the relationships between the hundreds of distributions
and how they are grouped (Debian-based, Slackware-based, etc). Might be
useful for your planning.
alt.os.linux - seems to be mostly flamefests against windows users
comp.os.linux.answers - seems to have a better signal to noise ratio
Jim Cornwall
| |
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-02, 3:57 am |
| If enough people mention the same system as "the one I use,"
that is important information.
I cannot, at this time, say anything about pricing. When I can, I
shall.
Sincerely,
Bob Corbett
| |
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-02, 3:57 am |
| > You should ask this over in some of the Linux newsgroups, too.
I am interested in getting the opinions of Fortran users. I am afraid
that
if I posted to the Linux news groups, I would get mostly "who cares
about
Fortran?" responses.
Sincerely,
Bob Corbett
| |
| Jim Cornwall 2005-09-02, 6:58 pm |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
>
>
> I am interested in getting the opinions of Fortran users. I am afraid
> that
> if I posted to the Linux news groups, I would get mostly "who cares
> about
> Fortran?" responses.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
Agreed, many of the reponses would be like that. However, once those
get filtered out, I think it'll still be the best source of info
regarding the distributions that ought to be targeted for testing. I do
occasionally see Fortran info in there.
Just my 3 cents.
Jim
| |
|
| Counting myself, I know 9 Fortran programmers at work (I mean Engineers /
Scientists)
At home:
Four of us use Gentoo Linux on Opteron/Athlon 64/X2
Other five use Fedora 3/4 on Opteron/Athlon64/FX/X2 and P4
Observation on age
Gentoo users are between 25 to 35 years old.
Fedora users are between 35 to 54 years old.
At work:
Presently, we are not using Linux but we might use it later (if state of
Fortran compilers on WIN64 remains poor)
We intend to migrate to WIN64 as soon as more Fortran compilers become
available for that platform (Intel is ready, Pathscale/Lahey is working on
it, others ??? )
<robert.corbett@sun.com> wrote in message
news:1125552675.294324.63110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
>
| |
| dooleys@snowy.net.au 2005-09-02, 9:56 pm |
| Idle speculation...
The gentoo users have young children
and are used to getting up in the night,
they can check their emerge before going back to bed.
The fedora users have teenagers so there
is no bandwidth available during the night.
Phil
| |
| Rich Townsend 2005-09-03, 6:57 pm |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
> If enough people mention the same system as "the one I use,"
> that is important information.
>
> I cannot, at this time, say anything about pricing. When I can, I
> shall.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
>
Gentoo is what I use. I might add that it's "unsupported" by Intel, and
the ebuild in Gentoo is pretty out of date. If anyone wants an
up-to-date ebuild, that extracts all necessary files from the
Intel-supplied RPM, and fixes up paths etc, then let me know, and I'll
put something up on my website. If there's enough demand, I'll look into
the steps required to get the ebuild into the official Gentoo portage tree.
cheers,
Rich
| |
| Dr Ivan D. Reid 2005-09-03, 6:57 pm |
| On 31 Aug 2005 22:31:15 -0700, robert.corbett@sun.com <robert.corbett@sun.com>
wrote in <1125552675.294324.63110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
Scientific Linux. Which, as far as I understand it, is based on RHEL.
--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".
| |
| Gary L. Scott 2005-09-03, 6:57 pm |
| robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. The compilers are currently being built and tested
> on Sun's Java Desktop System (JDS), Red Hat's RHEL 4, and
> SUSE's SLES 9. On which other Linux distros should the
> compilers be tested? I am particularly interested in the
> opinions of Fortran users.
>
> Sincerely,
> Bob Corbett
>
Same ones as the C compilers. My applications are not typically "number
crunchers" but full featured GUI/OS interfacing ones.
--
Gary Scott
mailto:garyscott@ev1.net
Fortran Library: http://www.fortranlib.com
Support the Original G95 Project: http://www.g95.org
-OR-
Support the GNU GFortran Project: http://gcc.gnu.org/fortran/index.html
Why are there two? God only knows.
If you want to do the impossible, don't hire an expert because he knows
it can't be done.
-- Henry Ford
| |
|
| One question:
Does SUN intend to port their unique hardware-supported interval libraries
(available in sparc/solaris compilers) to Linux x86/x64? if yes that gone be
great ...
Though very useful, our use of interval math is very limited --- due to the
lack of hardware/compiler-level interval libararies...
Thank you
<robert.corbett@sun.com> wrote in message
news:1125552675.294324.63110@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Sun recently announced that its compilers are being ported
> to Linux. ...
| |
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-06, 3:56 am |
| Sun doesn't have the clout to get something like the SPARC
SIAM instructions ported to the Intel or AMD64 architectures.
There has been lots of talk of porting intervals to x86 and x64,
but it hasn't made the cut yet.
Bob Corbett
| |
| Kamaraju Kusumanchi 2005-09-08, 3:57 am |
| Brooks Moses wrote:
> robert.corbett@sun.com wrote:
>
>
>
> I suspect that this is liable to get answers that boil down to "test it
> on the one I use", but I'll suggest Debian -- admittedly in part for
> that reason. Beyond that, It seems to be a well though-of system among
> the symins I know and trust, and Stanford University (which I attend
> as a grad student) is currently providing its networking-software
> packages for Red Hat and Debian.
>
I use Debian and I will strongly advocate it. I know many users who have
shifted from rpm based distributions (RH for example) to deb based
distributions (Debian for example) but I do not know of any people yet
who have shifted the other way around.
I use Debian unstable. But new users should probably start from stable
and can then shift to testing or unstable on a need by basis.
hth
raju
| |
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-08, 3:57 am |
| Would it be acceptable to provide Sun f95 as RPMs for Debian?
The platforms on which Sun is currently building the compilers
support RPM, but I don't think they support deb.
Bob Corbett
| |
| Harold Stevens 2005-09-08, 7:58 am |
| In <1126169446.943549.79940@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> robert.corbett:
[Snip...]
> support RPM, but I don't think they support deb.
I've not used Debian, but I understand there's a beta package converter
called "alien" which provides rudimentary conversions for some of these
package managers:
http://www.kitenet.net/programs/alien/
Again, I've not used any of this--hoping it provides some leads...
--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.
| |
| Toby White 2005-09-08, 7:58 am |
| robert.corbett@sun.com writes:
> Would it be acceptable to provide Sun f95 as RPMs for Debian?
> The platforms on which Sun is currently building the compilers
> support RPM, but I don't think they support deb.
Personally, as a Debian user, I'd rather you distributed a
simple gzipped tar file of the necessary files, with maybe
an install script which asks where I want to install the
files. This is what NAG does, and it means I know exactly
what files the compiler is putting where.
This also means that I can install it on any other Linux
distribution as well.
If you distribute an RPM, I've either got to rely on alien to
do the right thing in converting (which it doesn't always)
or unpack the RPM by hand, see what it's going to do & which
files are being put where and which files need edited.
--
Dr. Toby White
Dept. of Earth Sciences, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EQ. UK
Email: <tow21@cam.ac.uk>
| |
|
| Toby White wrote:
> robert.corbett@sun.com writes:
>
>
> Personally, as a Debian user, I'd rather you distributed a
> simple gzipped tar file of the necessary files, with maybe
> an install script which asks where I want to install the
> files. This is what NAG does, and it means I know exactly
> what files the compiler is putting where.
I use Debian and Fortran daily, and I strongly prefer RPMs
to tar.gz's . If you convert an RPM to a Debian package
and install it, it's extremely easy to upgrade the package
and to remove the entire package. That's a huge advantage.
You also know "exactly what files the [package] is putting where"
by typing
$ dpkg -L <pakage name>
I know an advantage of a tar.gz is that you can easily change
where the package is installed. (To do that with a Debian
package, you need to recreate the package, which is cumbersom.)
But, a situation where you need to change where to install the
package is rare (in my environment anyway).
Ryo
| |
| Toby White 2005-09-13, 6:59 pm |
| "Ryo" <furufuru@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp> writes:
> Toby White wrote:
>
> I use Debian and Fortran daily, and I strongly prefer RPMs
> to tar.gz's . If you convert an RPM to a Debian package
> and install it, it's extremely easy to upgrade the package
> and to remove the entire package. That's a huge advantage.
While I trust Debian to get upgrading/removing etc. right 90%
of the time (that's the main reason I use Debian) I don't really
trust anyone else to.
Given the number of bug reports I've submitted to Debian for their
own packages due to conflicting files, packages that don't remove
all their files when they're uninstalled etc., even less do I trust
third-party distributors to fit in correctly with the packaging
system. Especially if they're not even built as Debian packages,
but are converted from RPMs.
> You also know "exactly what files the [package] is putting where"
> by typing
>
> $ dpkg -L <pakage name>
Not until after I've already installed the package - which was
my point.
> I know an advantage of a tar.gz is that you can easily change
> where the package is installed. (To do that with a Debian
> package, you need to recreate the package, which is cumbersom.)
> But, a situation where you need to change where to install the
> package is rare (in my environment anyway).
Consider, please, that your environment may not be the only one.
If I'm going to install third-party applications, they're going
to go in /opt. They are certainly not going to go under /usr/bin,
where they're liable to conflict with assorted packages already
under the control of the packaging system. I know what's on my
system - Sun don't.
If files going under /opt, then I know that they can easily
be removed again by doing (eg) "rm -rf /opt/NAG"
Furthermore, if it's a tar.gz, I can install it under my home
directory without root permissions.
Anyway - I wasn't proposing that Sun not distribute RPMs - I
was merely suggesting that in addition, they distribute a
tar.gz file as well. It's not like it's any more work, and
it'll save anyone not using an RPM-based distribution a bit
of time & energy.
--
Dr. Toby White
Dept. of Earth Sciences, Downing Street, Cambridge CB2 3EQ. UK
Email: <tow21@cam.ac.uk>
| |
|
| Toby White wrote:
> Anyway - I wasn't proposing that Sun not distribute RPMs - I
> was merely suggesting that in addition, they distribute a
> tar.gz file as well. It's not like it's any more work, and
> it'll save anyone not using an RPM-based distribution a bit
> of time & energy.
First of all, I agree to this point. It's better to have both
an RPM and tar.gz's.
>[...]
>
> Not until after I've already installed the package - which was
> my point.
In that case,
$ rpm2cpio some-rpm-package.rpm | cpio -t
Also, you can extract the contents of an RPM as if it were
a tar archive using "cpio -i".
> Consider, please, that your environment may not be the only one.
> If I'm going to install third-party applications, they're going
> to go in /opt. They are certainly not going to go under /usr/bin,
> where they're liable to conflict with assorted packages already
> under the control of the packaging system. I know what's on my
> system - Sun don't.
So, it seems my experience is pretty limited. I've installed
a number of converted RPM's, but I've never had conflicts.
A few observations are in order:
1) I recall there was one package which tried to overwrite an existing
file. Fortunately, "dpkg -i" doesn't silently overwrite an existing
file, so I simply quit the installation and discarded the package.
2) There were packages which didn't work, but in that case I simply
removed them;
3) I've never checked whether all files are cleanly removed when I
removed a package, so there may be some carbage hidden somewhere
in my directories.
To summarize, for me, RPMs either work or not; they don't mess up
my existing system. As you say, this may well be different
depending on how you use your Debian system.
> If files going under /opt, then I know that they can easily
> be removed again by doing (eg) "rm -rf /opt/NAG"
Your argment makes me think that the best strategy (if not have both
RPM and tar.gz) is to distribute an RPM which installs all files
in /opt/<something> or /usr/local/<something> . Then, the fear of
conflicts is gone. In fact, the RPM of the Intel Fortran compiler
installs everything under /opt/intel .
Regards,
Ryo
| |
| andy2O 2005-09-14, 7:57 am |
| Toby White wrote:
>
> Consider, please, that your environment may not be the only one.
> If I'm going to install third-party applications, they're going
> to go in /opt. They are certainly not going to go under /usr/bin,
> where they're liable to conflict with assorted packages already
> under the control of the packaging system. I know what's on my
> system - Sun don't.
>
> If files going under /opt, then I know that they can easily
> be removed again by doing (eg) "rm -rf /opt/NAG"
>
> Furthermore, if it's a tar.gz, I can install it under my home
> directory without root permissions.
I'd just like to 2nd these two points, and hope to help persuade Bob
Corbett to push Sun to provide tar.gz or .bin bundles...
1) Being able to install software to /opt, keeping changes neatly
contained and well away from /usr/bin/ etc. has been crucial in
persuading sys-admins to install software I wanted at my last two
places of work.
2) Being able to install as non-root (yes - when local rules allow it)
is also a god-send, when the IT guy is forever too busy and you just
need to get on with things.
Infact, Sun's own Java SDK installer for Linux seemed very simple and
distro independent, and meets both of Toby and my concerns 1 & 2 above.
If Sun's Java team have got it right, why not just copy that? :-)
Anyway, I look forward to trying a new compiler on Linux.
Andy.
[I also seem to remember Intel's installer for ifort on Linux was
similarly straight forward and seemed quite distro-independent when I
put ifort on my laptop. Perhaps Sun could do something similar.]
| |
| Pierre Asselin 2005-09-14, 7:00 pm |
|
On Linux, all generalizations are false.
Ryo <furufuru@ccsr.u-tokyo.ac.jp> wrote:
> Your argment makes me think that the best strategy (if not have both
> RPM and tar.gz) is to distribute an RPM which installs all files
> in /opt/<something> or /usr/local/<something> .
Not in /usr/local, unless it's /usr/local/stow/<something> or
/usr/local/depot/<something>. See http://www.gnu.org/software/stow/
Personally I prefer tarballs with relative paths. Although with
gnu tar's --strip-components option I can extract the tarball
wherever I want even if it has absolute paths.
--
pa at panix dot com
| |
| robert.corbett@sun.com 2005-09-15, 6:59 pm |
| > I'd just like to 2nd these two points, and hope to help persuade Bob
> Corbett to push Sun to provide tar.gz or .bin bundles...
It is fairly certain that for the initial release, only RPMs will be
available
on CD-ROMs. We have been exploring the possibility of providing
tarballs as downloads.
Bob Corbett
|
|
|
|
|