Code_Saturne tarballs: code-saturne.org vs GitHub

All questions about installation
Forum rules
Please read the forum usage recommendations before posting.
Post Reply
christoph-conrads
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:07 pm

Code_Saturne tarballs: code-saturne.org vs GitHub

Post by christoph-conrads »

The Code_Saturne 6.0 tarballs hosted on code-saturne.org and on GitHub differ massively in size:

Code: Select all

$ du --si -s code_saturne-6.0.5.tar.gz v6.0.5.tar.gz 
177M    code_saturne-6.0.5.tar.gz
20M     v6.0.5.tar.gz
$ sha256sum code_saturne-6.0.5.tar.gz v6.0.5.tar.gz 
353308b43e54167a880814b613084e0feb3fe7b27b13348161cc82abbb1b2cb8  code_saturne-6.0.5.tar.gz
7cbabf823b765e6791c6f36caaae444e247903e991a4bd30274963a4962b4399  v6.0.5.tar.gz
I was working on a Spack build for Code_Saturne + Melissa and Spack complained about mismatching hashes when I added GitHub as a "mirror" for the Code_Saturne tarballs.

Please add a warning somewhere that the Code-saturne.org tarball contains a built Doxygen documentation (275+ MB!).
Yvan Fournier
Posts: 3284
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Code_Saturne tarballs: code-saturne.org vs GitHub

Post by Yvan Fournier »

Hello,

This is implied in the install documentation, though I can make this more explicit.

In versions 6.1 and above, the size of the Doxygen documentation is significantly reduced (simply by switching from .png to .svg file generation options), but is still much larger than a GtHub-generated .tarball.

In any case, if you have Spack build rules you might be interested in sharing, we could put them in the GitHub wiki. Having a community-improved installer would be nice.

Best regards,

Yvan
christoph-conrads
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Feb 02, 2021 1:07 pm

Re: Code_Saturne tarballs: code-saturne.org vs GitHub

Post by christoph-conrads »

In any case, if you have Spack build rules you might be interested in sharing, we could put them in the GitHub wiki. Having a community-improved installer would be nice.
Hi Yvan, as far as I am concerned, the build will be shared with you. Ideally, it should be also be submitted to the Spack maintainers so that it is shipped with their next release but I still need to familiarize myself with Spack.
Yvan Fournier
Posts: 3284
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 3:25 pm

Re: Code_Saturne tarballs: code-saturne.org vs GitHub

Post by Yvan Fournier »

Hello Christoph,

Yes, that would be nice. It might be interesting to improve the script to include all major dependencies before submitting it to spack maintainers.

Though this also depends how far you want to go. A full build with ParaView + OSMesa, including OSRray one one side, and possibly PETSc on the other (though the latter is useful mainly for CDO models, still WIP, so not urgent) would be great, but might take quite a bit of effort. Unless there are already some Spack rules for this , which would be great. Dependencies such as Melissa are very lightweight and easy to install by comparison...

So it depends on the target, but if this can be improved incrementally, I would be indeed be happy to start somewhere.

Best regards,

Yvan
Post Reply