Re: [AMBER-Developers] CMake vs configure2 in Amber

From: Scott Le Grand <varelse2005.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2021 14:32:45 -0700

Cmake (IMO and entirely IMO) is great if you have someone full-time to
maintain it. If we are willing to invest those resources, great, then cmake
issues are on cmake person and they get to own it going forward. Trying to
offload this onto the AMBER community will ensue hilarity
#HearMeNowBelieveMeLater

I'm all for new ideas, but I'm against new ideas without funding and
commitment.

Scott



On Sun, Apr 4, 2021 at 2:26 PM Scott Brozell <sbrozell.comcast.net> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> New subject to get back to the main thread.
>
> On Sun, Apr 04, 2021 at 08:51:00AM -0400, David A Case wrote:
> > On Sat, Apr 03, 2021, Scott Le Grand wrote:
> >
> > >cmake is still not quite ready for prime time disruption of configure.
> It's
> > >getting there though.
> >
> > If there are problems with cmake, please create an issue on gitlab, and
> > mention .multiplemonomials to get Jamie's attention. Please try to avoid
> > the syndrome of saying "I can get this to work with configure, and I'm to
> > busy right now to do anything else."
> >
> > I have removed the documentation for the configure process in the Amber21
> > Reference Manual, although the files are still present. We can't
> continue
> > to support and test two separate build systems, each with their own bugs.
>
> The evidence supports that legacy configure is easier to maintain and
> extend.
>
> This may be a somewhat surprising result given the sprawl of configure2,
> but since developers are script writers it is straightforward for them
> to examine configure2 with eyeballs or grep and figure out what needs
> to happen to support something new or fix something broken.
>
> In contrast cmake complicates simple grepping and spreads building over
> many files; approximately 211 of them presently. In addition, cmake
> expertise in our group is limited, to approximately 1 person based on
> Dave's comment above.
>
> The evidence is plentiful; here are some very recent ones:
> The evidence includes merge 827 and temporally close MRs, where cmake
> didnt build reaxff_puremd (and so CI on reaxff_puremd has been turned off)
> but legacy configure builds reaxff_puremd fine; similar story for pbsa.cuda
> where cmake fails and legacy configure works.
> In addition, there are a number of cmake quirks/gotchas reported by me
> in the testing wiki.
>
> scott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Sun Apr 04 2021 - 15:00:06 PDT
Custom Search