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 cice5 package.py #8

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 30, 2023
Merged

Update cice5 package.py #8

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 30, 2023

Conversation

harshula
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

packages/cice5/package.py Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/cice5/package.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/cice5/package.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/cice5/package.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
packages/cice5/package.py Show resolved Hide resolved
@harshula
Copy link
Collaborator Author

harshula commented Mar 26, 2023

The following changes to cice5 are a pre-requisite before merge: ACCESS-NRI/cice5#5

* NOTE: The order of the libraries matter during the linking step!
* NOTE: datetime-fortran is a dependency of libaccessom2.
* copy cice5's bld/build.sh as a template to build from spack
@harshula
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Ready for Review!

@harshula harshula requested a review from aidanheerdegen March 29, 2023 11:40
@harshula harshula marked this pull request as ready for review March 29, 2023 11:43
@harshula
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@harshula
Copy link
Collaborator Author

NOTE 2: There is an additional patch "cice5: simplify build script and Makefile snippet" that I'll commit to the development branch once this PR is merged. W.R.T. spack-build.sh, please focus on detecting any bugs during the review and please do not spend time on how to improve it. Save that for the review of the aforementioned patch.

Copy link
Member

@aidanheerdegen aidanheerdegen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've checked the logic and the specific numbers of the 722 case and they look fine. I can check the other NTASK configs if you want a sanity check.

Otherwise looks good and I'm happy to merge.

@harshula
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I can check the other NTASK configs if you want a sanity check.

Yes, please.

@aidanheerdegen
Copy link
Member

All checked and seem fine.

@harshula harshula merged commit 1137561 into main Mar 30, 2023
@harshula harshula deleted the cice5 branch March 30, 2023 02:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants