Do not initialize config on spack compiler list by haampie · Pull Request #28042 · spack/spack

haampie · 2021-12-16T11:31:31Z

spack compiler list should show the current config and not write new compilers to config.

msimberg · 2021-12-16T16:09:47Z

Thanks @haampie! I don't know if this already fixes the following, but I noticed that doing spack spec <spec> also populates the list of compilers if empty.

alalazo · 2021-12-16T16:23:18Z

@msimberg I personally agree with spack compiler list, but I think going further than that requires some more discussion. Reasons for that:

We have been advertizing this behavior in the docs since ever so I think there might be people depending on it (" Spack searches for compilers on your machine automatically the first time it is run")
There are other places where we automate configuration setting, if none is present, and I think we should be consistent. I would found it really strange if Spack looks automatically for e.g. core compilers for Lmod configuration but doesn't look for compilers on the platform

msimberg · 2021-12-16T19:15:52Z

@msimberg I personally agree with spack compiler list, but I think going further than that requires some more discussion. Reasons for that:

1. We have been advertizing this behavior [in the docs](https://spack.readthedocs.io/en/latest/getting_started.html#compiler-configuration) since ever so I think there might be people depending on it (" Spack searches for compilers on your machine automatically the first time it is run")

2. There are other places where we automate configuration setting, if none is present, and I think we should be consistent. I would found it really strange if Spack looks automatically for e.g. core compilers for Lmod configuration but doesn't look for compilers on the platform

Thanks @alalazo for giving a bit of context. I wanted to open #28038 since I really wasn't sure if it was intended behaviour or not. It was surprising behaviour to me, since it definitely was not "the first time" I ran spack. The context was that I was planning to change to a new system-provided config file, and first wanted to check that I didn't have any leftover compilers defined elsewhere before I changed to the new config.

Arguably "the first time it is run" can have quite a few different definitions and does not need to be equivalent to "running spack compiler list if there are no configured compilers".

I'm obviously personally happy with this PR, but I don't have any demands that this is the right fix and lack the bigger picture.

tgamblin

I think this is a good idea -- for 0.18.0 (though we'll hopefully be adding compilers as dependencies for that so this might change quite a bit before the release).

The docs don't actually seem to have anything that says spack compiler list should find compilers -- I grepped around and couldn't find it. They do have some sort of ambiguous mentions of spack compilers in configuration.rst and getting_started.rst.

Two requests:

Update configuration.rst and getting_started.rst.
If spack compiler list/spack compilers finds no compilers, it should prompt the user to run spack compiler find (if it's run from a tty). Can you add that?

lib/spack/spack/cmd/compiler.py

haampie · 2021-12-20T08:50:05Z

With the last commits:

$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$(mktemp -d) spack compiler list
==> No compilers available. Search for compilers? [y/n] n

$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$(mktemp -d) spack compiler list
==> No compilers available. Search for compilers? [y/n] y
==> Available compilers
-- clang ubuntu20.04-x86_64 -------------------------------------
[email protected]  [email protected]  [email protected]  [email protected]  [email protected]

-- gcc ubuntu20.04-x86_64 ---------------------------------------
[email protected]  [email protected]  [email protected]  [email protected]

$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$(mktemp -d) ~/spack/bin/spack compiler list | tee x
==> No compilers available. Search for compilers? [y/n] y
==> Available compilers
-- clang ubuntu20.04-x86_64 -------------------------------------
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

-- gcc ubuntu20.04-x86_64 ---------------------------------------
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

$ echo "hello world" | env SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$(mktemp -d) spack compiler list
==> No compilers available

$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$(mktemp -d) spack compiler list --scope=system
==> No compilers available

haampie · 2021-12-20T08:50:52Z

@tgamblin I'm not sure what docs sections you were referring to in configuration.rst

haampie · 2022-01-03T12:19:18Z

bump @tgamblin

haampie · 2022-01-12T08:57:59Z

bump @tgamblin

When `spack compiler list` is run without being restricted to a particular scope, and no compilers are found, prompt to search for compilers.

haampie · 2022-01-12T13:42:48Z

Okay, the interactive prompt is gone again, it's just showing nothing now when stdout is not a tty:

$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$PWD spack compiler list 
==> No compilers available. Run `spack compiler find` to autodetect compilers
$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$PWD spack compiler list --scope=system
==> No compilers available
$ SPACK_USER_CONFIG_PATH=$PWD spack compiler list | tee
$ echo $?
0

and there's a test that otherwise fails on develop.

… tty

When `spack compiler list` is run without being restricted to a particular scope, and no compilers are found, say that none are available, and hint that the use should run spack compiler find to auto detect compilers. * Improve docs * Check if stdin is a tty * add a test

spackbot-app bot added commands compilers labels Dec 16, 2021

haampie linked an issue Dec 16, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request

spack compiler list also finds compilers #28038

Closed

tgamblin requested changes Dec 19, 2021

View reviewed changes

tgamblin self-assigned this Dec 19, 2021

haampie force-pushed the fix/dont-init-config-on-spack-compiler-list branch from ecf58cf to 4ba8e32 Compare December 20, 2021 08:45

spackbot-app bot added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Dec 20, 2021

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021

View reviewed changes

lib/spack/spack/cmd/compiler.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spackbot-app bot added the tests General test capability(ies) label Jan 12, 2022

haampie added 5 commits January 12, 2022 14:40

Do not initialize config on spack compiler list

e7f0f45

Prompt to search for compilers

2d57878

When `spack compiler list` is run without being restricted to a particular scope, and no compilers are found, prompt to search for compilers.

Update lib/spack/spack/cmd/compiler.py

ccafc24

Improve docs

f55bf56

Check if stdin is a tty

969418d

haampie force-pushed the fix/dont-init-config-on-spack-compiler-list branch from 289568e to 1d7356d Compare January 12, 2022 13:40

Remove the interactive prompt, leave it at a comment when stdout is a…

cea654b

… tty

haampie force-pushed the fix/dont-init-config-on-spack-compiler-list branch from 1d7356d to cea654b Compare January 12, 2022 13:46

tgamblin approved these changes Jan 12, 2022

View reviewed changes

tgamblin enabled auto-merge (squash) January 12, 2022 14:14

tgamblin merged commit d74396a into spack:develop Jan 12, 2022

haampie deleted the fix/dont-init-config-on-spack-compiler-list branch January 13, 2022 10:59

This was referenced Feb 16, 2022

Add system compilers to compilers.yaml #28912

Closed

"No satisfying compiler available is compatible with a satisfying os", OpenSuse Tumbleweed #28911

Closed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Do not initialize config on spack compiler list#28042

Do not initialize config on spack compiler list#28042
tgamblin merged 6 commits intospack:developfrom
haampie:fix/dont-init-config-on-spack-compiler-list

haampie commented Dec 16, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

msimberg commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

alalazo commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

msimberg commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

tgamblin left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 3, 2022

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 12, 2022

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 12, 2022 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

Conversation

haampie commented Dec 16, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

msimberg commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

alalazo commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

msimberg commented Dec 16, 2021

Uh oh!

tgamblin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 3, 2022

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 12, 2022

Uh oh!

haampie commented Jan 12, 2022 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

haampie commented Dec 16, 2021 •

edited

Loading

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

haampie commented Dec 20, 2021 •

edited

Loading

haampie commented Jan 12, 2022 •

edited

Loading