Versions Compared

Old Version 6

changes.mady.by.user Kelly (Arrighi), Heather

Saved on

compared with

New Version 7

changes.mady.by.user Kelly (Arrighi), Heather

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Meeting Minutes March 24, 2010

Attendees: Heather Kelly,  Kim Lo, JJ Russell, Jana and Gregg Thayer, Tracy Usher, Tony Waite

Tony reviewed where he stood last October, see extreme bottom of this Confluence page.  JJ noted that he intended OBF to be independent of some of the lower level packages like PBS.  If that dependence is truly there, he may be able to clean it up.  Tony reminded us that CMX desires to build everything from the bottom up.  We have not previously attempted to excise bits of FSW and build subsets.

FSW options:

  1. Actually move all of FSW to build on RHEL5-64.
  2. Try to excise only what OBF requires.
  3. Something else?

and does this version propagate onto the satellite?

The Offline alternative is to keep OBS/FSW on RHEL4-32 and virtualize that step and pull it out of GR.

Tony on-the-fly-brainstorming thinks it may be possible to get CMT to build sub-trees, by using the special tags associated with RHEL5-only.
JJ and Gregg will review what portions of FSW are absolutely necessary for OBF.  Then Gregg and Kim can attempt a "path-finding effort" (where they basically compile and see what errors pop up and fix them) with Tony's assistance as necessary.

Jana requested that Tracy provide a list of FSW libraries that offline currently depends on (where that list was obtained by building and adding libraries in until all missing references were resolved):

"CDM/V0-2-4"
"EDS_DB/V0-0-2"
"EFC_DB/V2-0-0"
"GEO_DB/V2-0-0"
"GGF_DB/V2-0-0"
"GFC_DB/V3-0-0"
"XFC_DB/V3-1-1"
"CPU_DB/V0-4-2"
"LEM_DB/V0-1-5"
"CGB_DB/V0-1-0"
"COP_DB/V0-0-1"
"CPP_DB/V0-1-1"
"COG_DB/V0-0-1"
"CPG_DB/V0-1-0"
"EFC/V4-3-0"
"XFC/V0-1-2"
"EDS/V2-9-1"
"PBI/V0-1-0"
"LSE/V1-3-6"
"FBS/V0-2-3"
"CMX/V2-12-2"
"CAB/V1-0-0"
"MDB/V0-0-1"
"ZLIB/V2-4-0"
"PBS/V2-10-15"
"EMP/V1-3-5"
"IMM/V0-3-2"
"MSG/V3-1-1"
"ITC/V3-9-0"
"CCSDS/V3-5-2"
"LCBD/V1-4-3"
"LCBT/V1-6-1"
"THS/V1-6-1"
"LEM/V4-7-1"

Options

Consequences

Convince FSW to exert effort to build on 64 bit machines

Work cannot start until February and it is unclear how much time will be necessary or how many FSW packages will require updates.

Build FSW (or portions of it) ourselves using CMT (actually do we want to use FSWs CMX build system?)

Can we afford the resources to do that?  Building is one thing - working through the pilie of issues for 64 bit or gcc 4 is another and would still likely require a lot of interaction with the FSW team.

Ask FSW to at least support gcc 4 but stay with 32 bit (RHEL5-32)

May be as much effort as moving to 64 bit and gcc 4
Work cannot start until February
Many concerns about distributing such 32 bit builds to the collaboration where those with an interest in gcc4 would likely have 32 bit machines.  We cannot mix and match 32 bit and 64 bit libs.

Stay with what we have: FSW built on RHEL4-32

We would have to upgrade to this newer FSW build to take advantage of it, hopefully not too labor intensive as the OBF portion is supposedly unchanged.
Either we freeze all of GR on RHEL4-32 -  we can run a RHEL4-32 build on RHEL5 - but requires that compatibility libs be available on the machines this may cause problems for non-SLAC machines if they are not set up. 
OR
we extract the OBF portions of GR to allow the rest of GR to move ahead. OBF becomes its own separate step in the processing and to support more modern OSes we would virtualize the OBF step.  Virtualizing the OBF step will also involve some work - who will do that?

Stop using OBF and write our own filter code as we did in the old days

Risk of not fully duplicating the existing OBF code.  Future changes to OBF in FSW would then have to be reflected in our version (it is unclear how much more modification to OBF there really will be though).

...