codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Codecov Report
Merging #466 (3773227) into master (276a826) will increase coverage by
1.27%. The diff coverage isn/a.
Closed rs028 closed 1 year ago
codecov[bot]
commented
1 year ago Merging #466 (3773227) into master (276a826) will increase coverage by
1.27%. The diff coverage isn/a.
rs028
commented
1 year ago @spco Any comments? The idea is to work towards more consistency of the various tools, as well as naming and formatting. I am going to merge this and leave further updates to the manual and readme file for another time.
PS: can the trigger_action_on_PR_merge branch be deleted?
spco
commented
1 year ago @spco Any comments? The idea is to work towards more consistency of the various tools, as well as naming and formatting. I am going to merge this and leave further updates to the manual and readme file for another time.
PS: can the
trigger_action_on_PR_mergebranch be deleted?
I've now deleted this too.
spco
commented
1 year ago Looks like macos is now up and running again - I've made it a bit more robust in its handling of matrix.os so we don't have to remember to change it in multiple places.
You're right that macos-12 only supplies gfortran-11 out of the box. My concern is that our GH Actions may swiftly outpace the likely target machine for users - and HPC is far more likely to have gfortran-8 than 11! Perhaps we could consider reinstating the brew install workaround for macos-12 to install gfortran-9 and gfortran-10? TBH I think brew installing gfortran-8 on both would also be quite desirable.
rs028
commented
1 year ago Looks like
macosis now up and running again - I've made it a bit more robust in its handling ofmatrix.osso we don't have to remember to change it in multiple places.You're right that
macos-12only suppliesgfortran-11out of the box. My concern is that our GH Actions may swiftly outpace the likely target machine for users - and HPC is far more likely to have gfortran-8 than 11! Perhaps we could consider reinstating thebrew installworkaround for macos-12 to install gfortran-9 and gfortran-10? TBH I thinkbrew installinggfortran-8on both would also be quite desirable.
this is my concern, and also to keep backwards compatibility but within reason, otherwise it becomes a nightmare to maintain.
spco
commented
1 year ago I'll have a play around to see what we can do without it indeed becoming a maintenance nightmare!
spco
commented
1 year ago Ok, I'm going to revert the last few commits and abandon gfortran-8 on either platform for now. The reasons:
(1) on ubuntu, gfortran-8 is no longer in the package managers (minimum supported is 9). The only alternative is to compile from source, which is possible but will take a few minutes of compute time, and I don't have time to get that working right now.
(2) on macOS, for some reason the CVODE install insists that gfortran-8 is not a functioning fortran compiler. It then deactivates the FCMIX flag, which means that the *_fcvode.a libraries are not built. It then fails later at the stage of running the atchem2 executable as it can't link to the nonexistent libraries. I'm not sure what would be required to make CVODE think gfortran-8 is functional, so I'll drop that for now too due to time.
So we should end up with ubuntu-22.04, macos-11 and macos-12, all running gfortran-9, 10 and 11.
It would still be desirable to get gfortran-8 running on at least one architecture in future, but not crucial.
rs028
commented
1 year ago Sounds reasonable. And thanks for sorting this out. I will now try to push my last changes and (if you are done) merge this branch.
spco
commented
1 year ago Yep, I'm all done.
This branch includes a number of minor updates, fixes, tweaks, and corrections made while working on the new Test Suite:
*.mdfiles..gitignorefiles.mcm/mechanism_test.facto themodel/directory and rename it tomechanism.fac. This seems a more logical location for an example mechanism.version.shscript toupdate_version_number.sh.