From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54117) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drN4R-0001JL-3B for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:40:11 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drN4M-0004ka-3w for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:40:07 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:51937) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drN4M-0004kQ-0t for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:40:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drN4L-0000dt-OP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Sep 2017 07:40:01 -0400 Subject: [bug#28045] [PATCH] gnu: Add openfoam Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <513001199.42346965.1504884898846.JavaMail.root@centurylink.net> <87ingt9blp.fsf@gnu.org> <1505121536.2356.21.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2017 13:39:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: <1505121536.2356.21.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> (Paul Garlick's message of "Mon, 11 Sep 2017 10:18:56 +0100") Message-ID: <87mv61a2hn.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Paul Garlick Cc: 28045@debbugs.gnu.org Hi Paul, Paul Garlick skribis: > I think it is helpful to consider this question in two ways; thinking abo= ut the short term and the longer term. I think in the short term it is best= to stick with the OpenFOAM-standard layout, modified in the 'middle-road' = way suggested > earlier. On top of the previous points made, there is an additional advan= tage to this approach in that the OpenFOAM-standard layout has been thoroug= hly tested in production use over many years. > > In the longer term I think it would be possible to develop a Guix-standar= d layout. I cannot see any reason why this would not work. However, with a = large system such as OpenFOAM, this may not necessarily be an easy task. I = see this > as principally an upstream job, since they are the most knowledgeable peo= ple on the current layout and are best placed to deal with any subleties in= volved. With a working Guix package in place it will be a good time to cont= act > upstream and discuss the merits of a new layout. I agree. So for now, I=E2=80=99d say go with the bin/ symlink, and then st= art a discussion with upstream to see how to improve things in the future. > Today I hope to finish the package definition. I have placed the tree und= er the 'lib' directory and this allows the 'validate-runpath' phase to run.= The phase currently fails as ld-wrapper does not add the runpaths of the s= hared objects in > the build tree. I plan to use patchelf to fix this. I would refrain from using PatchELF, if possible, by just passing -Wl,-rpath=3DDIR at link time, where DIR is the final library directory. Ludo=E2=80=99.