Uploaded image for project: 'Request For Comments'
  1. Request For Comments
  2. RFC-631

Upgrade reference toolchain to devtoolset-8

    Details

    • Type: RFC
    • Status: Implemented
    • Resolution: Done
    • Component/s: DM
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Adam Thornton noticed earlier today that devtoolset-6 is no longer available from some of the mirrors we use to install packages, and according to

      https://access.redhat.com/support/policy/updates/rhscl

      it's almost a year past its formal retirement date.  Moreover, devtoolset-7 is only a month away from its formal retirement date, so I propose we go straight to supporting -8 only rather than both -7 and -8 (though I have no objection to continuing support for -7 for a bit longer, especially if it helps the transition - I just wanted to RFC dropping well before it too becomes urgent).

      While we should obviously test this before implementing it, there have been enough reports of the stack building successfully on newer compilers that I don't anticipate problems, and I don't think that needs to block RFC adoption.

      I'm giving this a short time window in case the CCB wants to take quick action before the weekly goes out this Friday; I'm not familiar with the details, but my understanding is that the lack of availability of devtoolset-6 may cause problems with that.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment - - edited

            I don't think we have ever officially supported devtoolset-7, although it has been installed.

            Paul Price reported that the stack built fine on devtoolset-8 up through pipe_drivers, which is all of lsst_apps and much of lsst_distrib, although I think there are some significant packages that are not included in that.

            As far as I know, since the ABIs of the compilers are compatible, code should be interchangeable, and there should be no need for deploying a new shared stack.

            (Oh, and I support doing this ASAP.)

            Show
            ktl Kian-Tat Lim added a comment - - edited I don't think we have ever officially supported devtoolset-7, although it has been installed. Paul Price reported that the stack built fine on devtoolset-8 up through pipe_drivers , which is all of lsst_apps and much of lsst_distrib , although I think there are some significant packages that are not included in that. As far as I know, since the ABIs of the compilers are compatible, code should be interchangeable, and there should be no need for deploying a new shared stack. (Oh, and I support doing this ASAP.)
            Hide
            gapon Igor Gaponenko added a comment - - edited

            How soon are we supposed to begin supporting C++17? I'm interested in the new std::filesystem (as a replacement for boost::filesystem}}

            Show
            gapon Igor Gaponenko added a comment - - edited How soon are we supposed to begin supporting C++17? I'm interested in the new std::filesystem (as a replacement for  boost::filesystem }}
            Hide
            frossie Frossie Economou added a comment -

            +1 to going to devtoolset-8 ASAP. Kinda feel bad we didn't move off 6 when it was EOLed.

            Show
            frossie Frossie Economou added a comment - +1 to going to devtoolset-8 ASAP. Kinda feel bad we didn't move off 6 when it was EOLed.
            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Igor Gaponenko C++17 support requires a different RFC but you can ask for such a thing. I believe you can make a request for Qserv that is distinct from science pipelines.

            I'm fine with going to devtoolset-8 until we transition to conda compilers.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Igor Gaponenko C++17 support requires a different RFC but you can ask for such a thing. I believe you can make a request for Qserv that is distinct from science pipelines. I'm fine with going to devtoolset-8 until we transition to conda compilers.
            Hide
            frossie Frossie Economou added a comment -

            PS. Jenkins will need changing (though hopefully just a config change) so please keep SQuaRE in the loop on implementation timeline.

            Show
            frossie Frossie Economou added a comment - PS. Jenkins will need changing (though hopefully just a config change) so please keep SQuaRE in the loop on implementation timeline.
            Hide
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment -

            Joshua Hoblitt tells me that devtoolset-8 is not available for centos6 so until we drop centos6 and replace it with centos8 we may need to move the centos7 Jenkins to devtoolset-8 and the centos6 to devtoolset-7.

            Show
            tjenness Tim Jenness added a comment - Joshua Hoblitt tells me that devtoolset-8 is not available for centos6 so until we drop centos6 and replace it with centos8 we may need to move the centos7 Jenkins to devtoolset-8 and the centos6 to devtoolset-7.
            Hide
            jhoblitt Joshua Hoblitt added a comment -

            Tim Jenness I may have lied about the availability of -8. It looks like devtoolset-8 has appeared for el6 now: http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/devtoolset-8/

            Show
            jhoblitt Joshua Hoblitt added a comment - Tim Jenness I may have lied about the availability of -8. It looks like devtoolset-8 has appeared for el6 now: http://mirror.centos.org/centos/6/sclo/x86_64/rh/devtoolset-8/

              People

              • Assignee:
                jbosch Jim Bosch
                Reporter:
                jbosch Jim Bosch
                Watchers:
                Colin Slater, Fabio Hernandez, Frossie Economou, Igor Gaponenko, Jim Bosch, John Swinbank, Joshua Hoblitt, Kian-Tat Lim, Krzysztof Findeisen, Leanne Guy, Michelle Butler, Susan Wrightson, Tim Jenness, Wil O'Mullane
              • Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                14 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                • Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:
                  Planned End:

                  Summary Panel