From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37171)
 by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j3kAh-0006gm-6N
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:27:04 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j3kAg-0002Yy-51
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:27:03 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33191)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
 (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>)
 id 1j3kAg-0002Yp-20
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:27:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1j3kAf-00085V-V0
 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Feb 2020 12:27:01 -0500
Subject: [bug#39588] gnu: Add mpich, scalapack-mpich, mumps-mpich,
 pt-scotch-mpich, python-mpi4py-mpich
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.39588.B39588.158196037631025@debbugs.gnu.org>
From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= <ludo@gnu.org>
References: <87blq2rclk.fsf@inria.fr>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 18:26:05 +0100
In-Reply-To: <87blq2rclk.fsf@inria.fr> ("Maurice
 \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Br\=C3\=A9mond\=22\?\=
 \=\?utf-8\?Q\?'s\?\= message of "Thu, 13 Feb 2020 11:44:07 +0100")
Message-ID: <87o8tx3z2q.fsf@gnu.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
List-Id: <guix-patches.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-patches>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-patches@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-patches>,
 <mailto:guix-patches-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org
Sender: "Guix-patches" <guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org>
To: Maurice =?UTF-8?Q?Br=C3=A9mond?= <Maurice.Bremond@inria.fr>
Cc: 39588@debbugs.gnu.org

Hi Maurice,

Thanks for the patches!  We like to have one patch per package, so I
started with MPICH:

Maurice Br=C3=A9mond <Maurice.Bremond@inria.fr> skribis:

> +(define-public mpich
> +   (package
> +     (name "mpich")
> +     (version "3.4a2")
> +     (source (origin
> +               (method git-fetch)
> +               (uri (git-reference
> +                     (url "https://github.com/pmodels/mpich")
> +                     (commit "644051d13dc20aecd460ba3db088756659c3dad3")=
 ; tag v3.4a2
> +                     (recursive? #t)))
> +               (sha256
> +                (base32
> +                 "02ildr7wh40q1qaq5k8npb6vw6kv9szmrm3lspr6skqa5csmrrxw")=
)))

I ended up modifying the package:

  =E2=80=A2 To use 3.3 instead of 3.4a, the latter being listed as =E2=80=
=9Calpha=E2=80=9D;

  =E2=80=A2 To build from an official tarball rather than from a Git checko=
ut,
    so that the GNU build system is already bootstrapped;

  =E2=80=A2 To ensure that the bundled copies of hwloc and ucx are not used.

I pushed the result here:

  https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git/commit/?id=3Dc70261bfb993cebc2=
3cd80042de3f52a8b7932a4

Let me know if I broke something.

As for the =E2=80=9C-mpich=E2=80=9D packages: they look good to me, though =
I=E2=80=99m not
entirely sure whether we should create =E2=80=9C-mpich=E2=80=9D variants fo=
r each of
them.  Ideally =E2=80=98--with-inputs=E2=80=99 would be enough, but I don=
=E2=80=99t know.  At
the same time, those variants don=E2=80=99t cost us much, so if they=E2=80=
=99re useful,
why not.

Thoughts, HPC folks?

Ludo=E2=80=99.