FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora User

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-21-2011, 09:30 AM
"antonio.montagnani@alice.it"
 
Default Openfoam

has anyone installed successfully Openfoam in Fedora?? (http://www.openfoam.org


I think that it should be included in official repo, as it is widely used in
teh academic world.

Tnx
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-21-2011, 03:58 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 4:30 AM, antonio.montagnani@alice.it
<antonio.montagnani@alice.it> wrote:
>
>
> has anyone installed successfully Openfoam in Fedora?? (http://www.openfoam.org
>
>
> I think that it should be included in official repo, as it is widely used in
> teh academic world.

I'm not interested in maintaining it, but I'll take a look and see how
easy it is to build.

Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-21-2011, 04:13 PM
"Daniel B. Thurman"
 
Default Openfoam

On 10/21/2011 02:30 AM, antonio.montagnani@alice.it wrote:
>
> has anyone installed successfully Openfoam in Fedora?? (http://www.openfoam.org
>
>
> I think that it should be included in official repo, as it is widely used in
> teh academic world.
>
> Tnx
Apparently, Ubuntu supports it.

The problem I have with OpenFOAM,
there is limited documentation and
there is there is no (free) GUI for it.

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-21-2011, 04:16 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 11:13 AM, Daniel B. Thurman <dant@cdkkt.com> wrote:
> On 10/21/2011 02:30 AM, antonio.montagnani@alice.it wrote:
>>
>> has anyone installed successfully Openfoam in Fedora?? (http://www.openfoam.org
>>
>>
>> I think that it should be included in official repo, as it is widely used in
>> teh academic world.
>>
>> Tnx
> Apparently, Ubuntu supports it.
>
> The problem I have with OpenFOAM,
> there is limited documentation and
> there is there is no (free) GUI for it.

Well, I haven't given up yet but there's already a couple of things I
don't like. It builds it's own make (called wmake) which is not
available in Fedora that I could find, and it also depends on a huge
3rd party source archive. I'm going to download it and take a look to
see what's in it, but it doesn't look promising.

Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-21-2011, 09:02 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

Wow this thing is strange.

It appears that you build in place, and by that I mean all the install
documentation I found says you go ahead and extract the archive to
it's installation place and build it.

You even have to source a bashrc file just to set it up so it will
build. I'm building now. I think I found system versions for
everything in the ThridParty archive except for two items.

I'll get this as far as I care to and package it up in an SRPM if you
want to finish it.

Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-22-2011, 08:47 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

Ok, I'm pretty much giving up. This is some strange software from a
build/install point of view. The build takes forever, bundles a lot of
projects... If anyone is interested in the source RPM I started let me
know. An easier option may be FreeFOAM. It's a fork of OpenFOAM that
uses cmake. It's only in release candidate but should be much easier
to package.

http://freefoam.sourceforge.net/index.html

Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-27-2011, 03:20 PM
David Gaden
 
Default Openfoam

(First post, am I doing it right?)

I saw you guys were looking at OpenFOAM, and Richard attempted a build but gave up.* I suspect this was bad timing - the guys at OpenCFD just patched their repository to accommodate the DSO linking changes (i.e. yesterday).* Also, as an (independent) OpenFOAM developer, can I be of assistance?

-Dave
~~~~
Follow me on Twitter @DavidGaden

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-27-2011, 03:43 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 10:20 AM, David Gaden <davegaden@hotmail.com> wrote:
> (First post, am I doing it right?)

Well I can read it so I guess so!


> I saw you guys were looking at OpenFOAM, and Richard attempted a build but
> gave up.* I suspect this was bad timing - the guys at OpenCFD just patched
> their repository to accommodate the DSO linking changes (i.e. yesterday).
> Also, as an (independent) OpenFOAM developer, can I be of assistance?

I see that from the average user point of view (POV) that the current
install method keeps things easy, but from a system-wide install POV,
it's horrendous.

To bullet point the issues and obstacles to building for eventual
inclusion to Fedora...

First just plain building/installing issues (never mind the Fedora guidelines).

1. The build from source documentation is pretty bad. The "System
Requirements" need to be broken up between build requirements and
runtime requirements. I.e, do I need <blah> or <blah>-devel... It has
some specific build instructions for different distros and I think I
figured most of them out, but what I need is a list of ALL of the
requirements regardless if their available in a specific distro or
not, I can figure that part out on my own. A table would be really
useful. Something like:

Upstream Project name | Required for (build/runtime/optional?) | Name
in Debian/Ubuntu | Name in SUSE, | etc...

2. The documentation seems to have instructions that are not strictly
needed for installation, but I could just be confused.

3. Wanting to be compiled in the location it's installed to is bad,
bad, bad. It makes building for a system wide install hard. I think I
almost got that working but setting 'foaminstall' to one location for
the build, and then changing it for the install location, but it's
messy.

4. Along those lines, is the entire source tree really needed during use?

Now more Fedora specific issues:

5. The ThridParty package is completely unacceptable. Anything in
there that isn't currently already in Fedora will need to be packaged
first.

6. I'm not sure if the built-in wmake tool is acceptable, it seems to
come from openwatcom.org, it will also need to be packages separately.

7. The 'copy the entire source-tree with the compiled binaries and
libraries' issue from #3. I'm not sure it will be acceptable.

Now once all those are taken care of, all the 3rd party stuff will
have to be ripped out during build to make sure it's not used and the
makefiles patched to use the system libraries where necessary.

All-in-all, a lot of work. Do any of the recent changes solve any of
these issues?

Thanks,
Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-28-2011, 01:44 AM
David Gaden
 
Default Openfoam

Looks like I'm not going to be much help.

>1. The build from source documentation is pretty bad. The "System
>Requirements" need to be broken up between build requirements and
>runtime requirements. I.e, do I need <blah> or <blah>-devel... It has...

I don't know the full list. The distro install instructions list packages required for each supported OS, suggesting someone has the list you need.

>2. The documentation seems to have instructions that are not strictly
>needed for installation, but I could just be confused.

I don't see anything unnecessary in this:*http://www.openfoam.org/git.php

>3. Wanting to be compiled in the location it's installed to is bad...

There's still a lot of old-school left in OpenFOAM.* Object files go into subdirectories within each library.* The #include strategy is particularly stupid - each library requires a directory with shortcuts to all files in its scope.* There are scripts that attempt to maintain these, but they don't always work, and the fail mode of name collisions is apparently to destroy both files.

>4. Along those lines, is the entire source tree really needed during use?

The library is broken down into multiple sub-libraries.* It shouldn't bee too hard to pull it apart to make large, logically grouped extension packages, like openFOAM-core, openFOAM-chemistry, openFOAM-lagrange, and so on.

>Now more Fedora specific issues:
>
>5. The ThridParty package is completely unacceptable. Anything in
>there that isn't currently already in Fedora will need to be packaged
>first.

Outside my realm of expertise - I don't know much about the third party stuff.* Some are pretty standard: openmpi, cmake.* But then again, some of them are pretty old too, and I guess we'd have to package these ourselves.

>6. I'm not sure if the built-in wmake tool is acceptable, it seems to
>come from openwatcom.org, it will also need to be packages separately.

I think wmake is native to OpenFOAM - although openwatcom's description of theirs is identical.* The wmake source files have OpenFOAM's standard comment headers.* If you have to get rid of it, you are right about FreeFoam.* Last I heard, the project is still unfinished, but the guys who manage the OpenFOAM-extend fork are borrowing FreeFoam's cmake solution for their Windows port.* I understand the Windows port is a huge struggle, and is also unfinished... so I'm not sure how much of the struggle is associated with the cmake aspect.

>7. The 'copy the entire source-tree with the compiled binaries and
>libraries' issue from #3. I'm not sure it will be acceptable.
>
>Now once all those are taken care of, all the 3rd party stuff will
>have to be ripped out during build to make sure it's not used and the
>makefiles patched to use the system libraries where necessary.
>
>All-in-all, a lot of work. Do any of the recent changes solve any of
>these issues?

No.

I didn't realize how much work would be involved.* I'd say we give it a little more time to mature.* The community is growing, and there's pressure to modernize the project.

Sincerely
-Dave
~~~~
Follow me on Twitter @DavidGaden

--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 
Old 10-28-2011, 05:54 PM
Richard Shaw
 
Default Openfoam

On Thu, Oct 27, 2011 at 8:44 PM, David Gaden <davegaden@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> Looks like I'm not going to be much help.
>
>>1. The build from source documentation is pretty bad. The "System
>>Requirements" need to be broken up between build requirements and
>>runtime requirements. I.e, do I need <blah> or <blah>-devel... It has...
>
> I don't know the full list. *The distro install instructions list packages required for each supported OS, suggesting someone has the list you need.

Yup, just need to find it.


>>2. The documentation seems to have instructions that are not strictly
>>needed for installation, but I could just be confused.
>
> I don't see anything unnecessary in this:*http://www.openfoam.org/git.php

That looks like a slightly cleaner version of what I was using from
the download link:
http://www.openfoam.com/download/source.php


>>3. Wanting to be compiled in the location it's installed to is bad...
>
> There's still a lot of old-school left in OpenFOAM.* Object files go into subdirectories within each library.* The #include strategy is particularly stupid - each library requires a directory with shortcuts to all files in its scope.* There are scripts that attempt to maintain these, but they don't always work, and the fail mode of name collisions is apparently to destroy both files.
>

>>4. Along those lines, is the entire source tree really needed during use?
>
> *The library is broken down into multiple sub-libraries.* It shouldn't bee too hard to pull it apart to make large, logically grouped extension packages, like openFOAM-core, openFOAM-chemistry, openFOAM-lagrange, and so on.

Not really the answer to what I was asking, but good to know. What I
meant is the way that the install works, or rather doesn't work.
There's no "make install" method, you extract the source from its
archive directly to the install location and build it in place, which
makes packaging difficult.

So my question really was: Is the complete source needed after
building the binaries and libraries? The current install method would
suggest it is.


>>Now more Fedora specific issues:
> *>
>>5. The ThridParty package is completely unacceptable. Anything in
>>there that isn't currently already in Fedora will need to be packaged
>>first.
>
> Outside my realm of expertise - I don't know much about the third party stuff.* Some are pretty standard: openmpi, cmake.* But then again, some of them are pretty old too, and I guess we'd have to package these ourselves.

I think most of what's in the ThirdParty archive is already available.
I know openmpi and cmake are. I did a quick search for ParaView and
found this:

paraview-data.noarch : Data files for ParaView
paraview.x86_64 : Parallel visualization application
paraview-mpich2.x86_64 : Parallel visualization application
paraview-openmpi.x86_64 : Parallel visualization application

I assume we would need paraview, paraview-data, and paraview-openmpi.


>>6. I'm not sure if the built-in wmake tool is acceptable, it seems to
>>come from openwatcom.org, it will also need to be packages separately.
>
> I think wmake is native to OpenFOAM - although openwatcom's description of theirs is identical.* The wmake source files have OpenFOAM's standard comment headers.* If you have to get rid of it, you are right about FreeFoam.* Last I heard, the project is still unfinished, but the guys who manage the OpenFOAM-extend fork are borrowing FreeFoam's cmake solution for their Windows port.* I understand the Windows port is a huge struggle, and is also unfinished... so I'm not sure how much of the struggle is associated with the cmake aspect.

I'm not a cmake expert but as a packager it's my preferred building
tool. If there was a good windows build and install file I could
probably convert it for *nix.


>>7. The 'copy the entire source-tree with the compiled binaries and
>>libraries' issue from #3. I'm not sure it will be acceptable.
> *>
>>Now once all those are taken care of, all the 3rd party stuff will
>>have to be ripped out during build to make sure it's not used and the
>>makefiles patched to use the system libraries where necessary.
> *>
>>All-in-all, a lot of work. Do any of the recent changes solve any of
>>these issues?
>
> No.
>
> I didn't realize how much work would be involved.* I'd say we give it a little more time to mature.* The community is growing, and there's pressure to modernize the project.

Works for me, especially since I have no use for it but just like
packaging software. This piqued my interest because my major professor
and some of the graduate students at my alma mater were doing a lot of
CFD research.

Richard
--
users mailing list
users@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:47 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org