Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update module dependencies to use spack-stack instead of hpc-stack #1448

Closed
mark-a-potts opened this issue Oct 4, 2022 · 5 comments
Closed
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@mark-a-potts
Copy link
Contributor

Description

The hpc-stack approach to building the software stack required by the UFS-WM is being deprecated and the WM needs to be tested and validated with the new spack-based software stack.

Solution

EPIC will install spack-based modules for all the packages required by the WM under their role accounts and begin the process of validating their use with the WM via regression test comparisons.

@mark-a-potts mark-a-potts added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 4, 2022
@benjamin-cash
Copy link

@mark-a-potts - This came up in another discussion that I think has gotten buried, so I wanted to include it here. To use spack-stack the version of CMakeModules that ufs-weather-model points to will need to be updated. Right now it is pointing to cedeb2c, which is a year out of date. The S2S application at least will fail to build using that version of CMakeModules.

@GeorgeVandenberghe-NOAA
Copy link
Collaborator

There has been a lot of progress on this problem but it hasn't been reported here.

@zach1221
Copy link
Collaborator

@mark-a-potts I want to let you know I've successfully tested your spack installations on the three NOAA Cloud platforms so far.

@zach1221
Copy link
Collaborator

zach1221 commented May 12, 2023

@mark-a-potts looks like @ulmononian has created an additional issue for testing the new spack-stack UE on the tier 1 HPC resources. Are you Ok with me closing this as a duplicate and tracking the spack environmental testing from #1651 instead? 1651 can probably be closed when PR #1707 is merged.

@mark-a-potts
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yes, that is fine with me.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants