Hi Kris, On Fri, 16 Nov 2001 12:10:51 -0600 Kris Hagel <hagel@comp.tamu.edu> wrote concerning "ROOT disappeared on AFS": > Did ROOT on linux AFS (/afs/rhic/opt/brahms/root/root_v3.02.02) > disappear on purpose? If so I should have a fit!!!! > There was a message some time ago asking to see if there were > reasons not to remove it and just use root in the new and pro > directories. I enumerated a number of reasons not to remove it. > The response was not adequate in my mind. Furthermore I never wrote > back to say it was adequate and therefore my expectation was that it > would not be removed. On the other hand, you never wrote back saying the arguments [1,2] I proposed did not satisfy your concerns. In fact, I took you installing ROOT for Solaris on /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/new [3] as an indication that you indeed did agree with the arguments. > I am sitting here trying to get some semblance of work done and I > already don't have enough time to do things once which is obvious > given my dismal rate of production. I get really angry when I have > to do things over. I wrote an email last week (see previous email in response to Flemming), which clearly stated that I had intentions of removing all the "odd" installations on AFS. In the same email I called for comments ASAP. Since I hadn't received _any_ emails to the contrary, I went ahead and "cleaned house". It's fair to say that you had been warned. > Now, I suppose I should point my stuff at the root which is in > /opt/brahms/new. I will then spend at least one hour compiling my > brat to go to an earlier version of root (ie root v3.02.00). In fact, it shouldn't be that bad. I doubt very much that much have been changed in terms of interfaces from version 3.02/00 to 3.02/02, and since the libraries only carries major and minor version numbers in the soname, they are really quite compatible. Hence, very little in your installation actually needs to be changed. Also, it does not take an hour to compile BRAT on the rcas machines. > In addition, I am then at the mercy of whoever has a whim to put a > new root into the new directory which means that I will again lose > the time to compile when a new version has been inserted. There are 3 persons that can update ROOT on AFS, you, Flemming and I. You know this just as well as I do, so don't go flying up the wallpaper that untimely updates can happen to those installations. In general, as I wrote on numereous occasions, the policy must be to follow ROOT's "new", "pro", and "old" releases. Hence, updates are not at all as frequent as you seem to indicate. The only reason why the current ROOT installation does not correspond to a "pro" release of ROOT, is that we needed a serious bug fix that was not avabliable until 3.02/00. Again, this is something that I've described many many times over in the past. In fact, you've been updating stuff in /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/root much more frequently and agressive than in /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/new. > On the other hand, I feel constrained against updating root in the > /opt/brahms/new directory at my whim, because unlike some others (or > other), I worry that my action would cause people to lose time in > the middle of what they are doing which is what I am carping about > and which is another form of exactly what happened to me right now. > I could go on, but won't. Bla bla bla. Serious updates to the installations in /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/new and /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/pro has always been announced in good time. All this fire is really no good, since history tells us that you're wrong, plain and simple. Of course I worry about making people loss precious time - why the heck do you think I've so consitently made annoucments after annoucements? Certainly not because I enjoy it. You could ask around here, and you'll quickly understand that I only update stuff if I'm certain it will not crash jobs on the farm, or if it does crash jobs, that it's ok by the person who submitted the job. > There is not a single point in this message that I have not > expressed in some form or the other before. Given that it didn't > have any effect before, perhaps I have once again wasted my time by > writing it, but my opinion is that this has got to stop. Kris, I sent out due warning last week. I heard nothing, zero, nada. I then assumed that you were ok with this, also in light of our previous discussion, were I at least got the impression that you accepted the argument I made, that there's no problem with having ROOT and BRAT libraries in the same directory. In fact, that letter was a reply to you, so at least you should have seen and read it. > I will go to eat lunch and maybe I will cool down by the time I get back > and decide what to do. 'Tis, fairly simple. cd to your brat source dir, and do make, make install. There! And you'll use the same ROOT as the one that is used on the farm, as everyone else is using on the pii's and rcas', is maintained, and _not_ aggresively updated. In fact, if you started the building of BRAT before you went to lunch, it should be finished by the time you get back. Frankly I can't really understand your reaction. When we were planning BRAT 2, we also discussed how our software should in the end be installed. We discussed this at length, and what I believe we finally agreed upon was the structure we now have, that is, three seperate trees in /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/pro, /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/new, and /afs/rhic/opt/brahms/old. Therefor, it's stunning to see how "odd" installations in /afs/rhic/opt/brahms kept being updated. Yours, Christian Holm Christensen ------------------------------------------- Address: Sankt Hansgade 23, 1. th. Phone: (+45) 35 35 96 91 DK-2200 Copenhagen N Cell: (+45) 28 82 16 23 Denmark Office: (+45) 353 25 305 Email: cholm@nbi.dk Web: www.nbi.dk/~cholm [1] http://www.sdcc.bnl.gov/brahms/private/list_hyper/brahms-dev-l/1458.html [2] http://www.sdcc.bnl.gov/brahms/private/list_hyper/brahms-dev-l/1465.html [3] http://www.sdcc.bnl.gov/brahms/private/list_hyper/brahms-dev-l/1597.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Nov 16 2001 - 14:05:03 EST