|
From: R.K. O. Ph.D. <rk...@Ow...> - 2002-07-29 19:11:37
|
On Mon, 29 Jul 2002, David C. Mores wrote: > "R.K. Owen Ph.D." wrote: > > > > > 1) Does anyone use the .modulerc files? To do things like > > module-version > > Yes - although we use the older .version file to set a default version. If you wish to remove this, > then there needs to be an alternate way to set a default verison that can be different for different platforms. > The .version file would not go away. The current implementation does a "module-version xxx default" under the covers, and this is how the module-version mechanism sets default versions. > > > > 2) Caching for "module avail". I rarely enable it for my own > > systems, but I have maybe 50+ modulefiles on each. > > 'Modules avail' is a crucially important function. How would one otherwise determine what modulefiles and versions of modulefiles are available? You cannot expect all user to be smart enough to go 'ls' the modulefile areas. After all, isn't one of the principles here to isolate users from having to know inner workings like this? > "module avail" would not go away; however, without caching, it would just descend through the entire modulefile tree each time a "module avail" is requested. It would be comparable to doing a "find" on a modulefile directory tree, (and reading and interpreting every .version/.modulerc file it finds). R.K. +------------------+---------------------+ | R.K.Owen,PhD | rk...@ow... | | KooZ Software | Environment Modules | | NERSC/LBNL | rk...@ne... | +------------------+---------------------+ |
