Massimiliano Culpo comments

Results 448 comments of


                                            Massimiliano Culpo

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

It would be good if you could give us a reproducer environment. I see in the logs that the solver concretized to a `cray-mpich %c=rocmcc` when the request seemed to...

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

Thanks for the reproducer. There is indeed a bug in Spack, because your configuration is unsat - so the concretizer shouldn't error like this, but point you to the fact...

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

Here's a minimal reproducer for the error: spack.yaml ```yaml spack: toolchains: cray: - spec: "%c=cce" when: "%c" - spec: "%cxx=cce" when: "%cxx" - spec: "%fortran=cce" core: - spec: "%[email protected]" when:...

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

For the record I'm also attaching the facts I got by expanding manually the toolchain vs. using the reproducer: [lp_files.tar.gz](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/24087627/lp_files.tar.gz) Here one can see that a few facts are missing...

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

Hotfix for the bug: ```diff diff --git a/lib/spack/spack/spec_parser.py b/lib/spack/spack/spec_parser.py index bfdabe17f0..8c093ce01b 100644 --- a/lib/spack/spack/spec_parser.py +++ b/lib/spack/spack/spec_parser.py @@ -461,10 +461,13 @@ def _apply_toolchain( toolchain = self._parse_toolchain(name) self.parsed_toolchains[name] = toolchain - toolchain...

Specifying a toolchain more than once in the same root spec doesn't work correctly if it contains unconditional dependencies

Can you check #51731? With that you should obtain a more sensible error message, similar to: ``` $ spack -e . concretize ==> Error: failed to concretize `mpip %[when='%c'] c=cce...

mvapich-plus: v4.0 hash changed (?)

I see the same. @natshineman @MatthewLieber do you know why?

mvapich-plus: v4.0 hash changed (?)

@MatthewLieber Thanks for the explanation. The fact is that, if you do: ```console $ spack checksum mvapich-plus 4.0 ==> Found 1 version of mvapich-plus ==> Fetching https://mvapich.cse.ohio-state.edu/download/mvapich/mv2/mvapich-4.0.tar.gz version("4.0", sha256="c532f7bdd5cca71f78c12e0885c492f6e276e283711806c84d0b0f80bb3e3b74") ```...

mvapich-plus: v4.0 hash changed (?)

@MatthewLieber So am I understanding correctly that this is the recipe you use to create your closed source buildcache? And the sha is the sha256 of the closed source tar?...

Concretize reuse include concrete

Just saw this change on `develop`. Curious why this choice: ```yaml from: - type: environment: my_env ``` instead of this choice: ```yaml from: - type: environment name: my_env ``` which...