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

document experimental support for minimal toolchains #166

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 10, 2015

Conversation

boegel
Copy link
Member

@boegel boegel commented Nov 8, 2015

For the ``foss/2015b`` toolchain, EasyBuild will also consider ``GCC/4.9.3`` and ``gompi/2015b`` subtoolchains
as potential minimal toolchains (in that order) when determining the toolchain to use for dependencies, if the
``--minimal-toolchains`` configuration option is enabled.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd probably restructure this sentence a little as follows:

When the ``--minimal-toolchains`` configuration option is enabled, EasyBuild will also consider the subtoolchains ``GCC/4.9.3`` and ``gompi/2015b`` of ``foss/2015b`` toolchain (in that order) as potential minimal toolchains when determining the toolchain to use for dependencies. 

@ocaisa
Copy link
Member

ocaisa commented Nov 8, 2015

Looks good. I think its covers the basics pretty well.

@boegel
Copy link
Member Author

boegel commented Nov 9, 2015

Thanks for the review @ocaisa!

Will merge as soon as easybuilders/easybuild-framework#1306 is merged, just running some final tests for that one now.

boegel added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2015
document experimental support for minimal toolchains
@boegel boegel merged commit 39b2908 into easybuilders:develop Nov 10, 2015
@boegel boegel deleted the minimal_toolchains branch November 10, 2015 02:27
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants