modules-interest — Discussion forum for modules usage.

Re: Bug in Modules-2.2Beta (fix included)

[Swen T. <sw...@un...>]

On Fri, 26 Jul 1996, Jens Hamisch wrote:

> Did you try modules-3.0pre?
> It's available at ftp://ftp.connectde.net/sysadmin/sw-admininstration/modules.

No, I did not know about it. But I've tried it now and found some more
bugs (the strcpy one among them). The program crashed immediately, because
Tcl_GlobCmd() wants to write to its argument in tcl-7.5. So I had to
change the line
	arg[1] = "~/.modulesbeginenv";
to
	argv[1] = strdup("~/.modulesbeginenv");

There were some off-by-one errors and some uninitialized variables.
Additionally, Sun cc refused to compile utility.c (as did gcc -pedantic).
The error was
  non-constant initializer: op "NAME" (Sun cc)
  initializer element for `table[0]' is not computable at load time (gcc)
So I had to make changes like the following:

-    Tcl_HashTable      *table[] = { setenvHashTable, unsetenvHashTable };
+    Tcl_HashTable      *table[2]; 
+    table[0] = setenvHashTable;
+    table[1] = unsetenvHashTable;

I include the complete set of patches below (gzipped and uuencoded).

Greetings, Swen

begin 644 modules.diff.gz
M'XL("$N;_#$"`VUO9'5L97,N9&EF9@#E6EM3VTH2?C:U/Z+#J4U\C^4;8)9L
M.&`2GQA(@4FRE4.IA#2RM9$EER03.*>ROWV[9T;2R)8,9)-]V-6#QY[IN75_
M?94MQ[:AL0S@U+>6+@L;G69K$;"F'SC3EZ+O:&[IA[>&XS;-%:IU@JU&H_&X
MI4J71@2_&1Y`'UJM0:\SZ+1`V]OK;]5JM0?W*9WZ'ORV=*&]!UIG@`MT>V+V
MZ]?0V&FWZKM0$\WKUUM0@FKUY19L0?PX=MER`C>,=',9-%[9CAY&1A0VL6/N
M6PR>PZ4^.CD>753@SZT&*(\Y,X(J>(O]W&Y<='^KED</!W!V-1[GC^*T9%P=
M!L>+\#.:+TQ_B5\/H+5/URC1V,MJE=]6ZW9;]1VHR9;N2\\P"/Q@[$^G+"C#
MV;D^O+C0+R>'%Y,ZC,^/ZJ`O`M_$#]Q"-UQGZC%+MQUD>IT?I((;_<+P9#9N
MR*_Z=8:C97"=,(+GSZ$:?XGXV1H-8E4M)8R[B20SA^B@A!*`9\3TLNBMPW,N
M@@H?5JYH/0ZA5PO+B-@FB,84C\!H3+H"4JTW:/4?`=)DNHK2]J#;QQ52E&KM
M-A<;;V*IH31*>'7BB)[(O([LP,ZY<<<9>0!:?[]40N;`J7'7!&\YOV$!^+;@
M,_.BP&$A9Z#`O;+PS=*V6:"'SA],+G'D!`%.`>JB-:(90^+%,I*T?(E&#%;4
MI$44U,&4LR^88<'"Q]59$(+A69PJGBH/4%N;C7=X\7OKQ?[CUT!(_.+8\'$T
M>:L?#W^]>O-F=/9&/ST_OAH/CTZ/GX+Y54$E@-\(-7-N'?F>[3IFM(ZRS&`A
MP#)4Z]C2B@W@RLREA-4N:-J...@UQ...LVCN=NJ9!3;8QL.BQN;:CXH61Q0*4
M0];8\&<[W@<E$3`H.TW61%:>#24V0@8F'OH&FR4'CGL/KF]8S*H,?O>VR6RD
MEI&4G'@+!P=0#HU;9A%"0Y1^F5N^:K6"J'9=WRP3BA=&-`NARJ'HVY*D4JDD
MEN6I:Y:316N@50I6%J:&ECU_!\\.LB`B!!V..7CX!T=*A?0Q8-$R\,HP.1H3
MSLXO*@+-#?G`\--H`N63P]'XZF)8B?M?I2I)S[>-S&(>OQ<*;2.C2+D?P:;<
MU8I8I*SY'0SBLTIVP-!AI#(B</R'C'M(14>>[>>JIQC8I)J"XJEJ*6>M6/J=
M0:NKJ&2G0Y9>-(E"*B')-V`N*I;TB8$Y7Y2-8'K[6;NNPW84&";;YCQME+AE
MK.*^=:C.^6$PHLCI3<,)Z6MQ/1->0;L2^U:D1B*^#;2O'S9^HCN7M_'0)N[&
M-#G\[6[B;SHO8_2ZG0R'M;[PI?UVEL/2\[$`5XL<;PH3TP4[\.=D`AVOF1%%
M(X9Y+`,0O$1'/)^C6T)9-$@.0LF(,#M.$<Y#4T'"7[\U7&3_\(Z9RXCI>*P3
M'EV)PZ*GPE!,YV?D%A4>%0TAN]ZC*N?*2`QLDI"@R)%/;Y-\XED9Z71V!IV]
M5#I]C>-?-'$\#NCWY_XM"85"CKD1?$%O'\[\I6N1>_GG$F,9U_G"((CI#.\>
M?"0.@"Q6,XWK&R5B^^*^C+13=K=X'V%0C^%D$"T^MZ[1LO'ONF_;(<-(4R'"
M")=(*J1%<S;'C=AW+U)'B@"M;#EG?6Y=A3:2&"4'C@P3KT[7QR6;^-MEJ,CT
M^]8('.,&]9B#E7J6'M)`Q#N)-P]"X9)%S+O-!4,\M`D.,<U3`9',6T_1E"A%
MTW;K>ZBPO!&00-<@@E0R5779PZ/&4I6;J6OTNS(;$X2V'Y@4QG+W<4(_!%8,
MET>RQ,,;_*Z$PFD<6\71>.J'F!`\8\Y*!>3N.CEV+E7ZVLK9>,+VA./5,L>+
M;?@#A\Q,<HLFK1XU/YX^0E?^Z^'1NZ>$TT+F0^_VT7'T!XSS'=_+A68RM@F;
M"=$Z.-O:)G"F$U<<]MZ@JRD&J]7G!@N;N(#`GSP\\@'<Z8RD4L54O<Z3G/T,
M>,2VJL]>&\P6"+A'+ZTY\^Q>P90R=R-,!\2-^3Q^!I#*IFG</6I:[!]+]"@3
MJLB@V\Q]XA%<!_?'!2F$VU?5#_W<O@IY_)U4*'*P=349C77M*<@Z<3QYC`1:
M(G$6\12V7>4Z"5_6[R+ZQ4VX%?_OWX..\#@%8;3FNF[([D*UD.,Y&K%;J!'Q
M'%49M$%K%QVXH@R[/:X,O,G$5F77_TKYQ<R9SBH\<9\YT;/\F&KN6.@-:3\]
MNE\PFJ;\JB@QE<,#J8?H(<DCD+*ROY+%<N/W#[9X!F_\"/!0D/<H$7A<3*.:
MH=86M4-LE6+:*3-"U%:\,JFQ0Z$VW1L;2G!$"G.)[MN<);6,4MXNC81](\^)
MT/%C>)].D0F<,IQ9<3UUX"(`.MP2G0OFX[$UH,.MC&`04H[3.[6_`B\AKY\'
M+@V*6_BAZ9Z40,;,`$PC%9-%@LL=52Z?8D>RRO7]A6!\CT?PHOD1*/O*D#ZB
MB?0MFFW&6`[U3T*8UL*8AZR7:.FJJB1/#--QG<AA*W),^U4IIKVJ#-->DF".
M^)3%BF281R(/&A>"\;Q_DU*A=%^NCTM(,]WJ[(F+\C8C4\YT*'\-?`SK!>\K
M&R3Z44CGV0&(;TFE8U68>80B_SU_1\)=*UV,SCY\?/,V-M?E,*Z0B>(CIFU_
MM;;KTO_+)>MRL*)4@V@X1HOJJ;2>*,V+=E76/)C/BEG$]S4NRA6Y28G<DR<I
MD%L!R6:YT3N&NSBV?4N;13XL0\I+G!`ORTR#?HG$%KXZKAN+25QQ1\86O$VO
M^(T0+_9491IS*4V426X>]XX(XK^+WY'_A7DPP.6A(J^H*&,VT7YX/IY(G&:(
MQ@,C[Q>A:7BZ+9GU0ASO+YN]LH/6>-TIB]Y"GRR&UUUR7*_-<<ERRDG@"(_<
M!VUWT.H..KNI1^YT.<M%HQ9XQ>LD4=3I7"OODDY&XR$.T/L=I3>M/<IJ$V)H
M^U\OFR+J#&_8U/$PE]M67EJEA,A_:[DHY]%7E#WXA/9UIAXU,5T=4X8+%BY=
M>O\3%SVVM^N\*OCA?'R(0=90:E%7E`^Z6F?5C`SO,->TF,7+.L0Y!^/A/XR(
MPFD,W$S?LYTI>C,+0A^:S8)R#T[^1&\#R.'&%9@*68NT0JG:&R2_,Q\D3ZS.
MLURK,YKH2/YIM:JL`EVMCSZQLOQM,Y9=WS0BIL\+*GHKPX7H7J'+@7GQR[+5
MN=ETC-X&*Q%HM]VN]Q$`R9LR43T9V>AWP0G!`,L)F!GYP7U:$^+RXDY)MUUC
M2J5OWDILBA>03JA;S"9[<JF/+H]'%_1N1'D1_+2WD<N(&Y1UCB8#A;Q,*-:Y
MV"V.WY59F?I;:V>@*?QK[W;J6@MJO.UD56@R8V#[+CH%JK#-C'`F?)!X_8.>
MX(:EFL6L=0TB97Z+TR8T"Y-2:CZ3OO])12TT!\E@7=2P,EU;#4K=A*6@5!;-
M@D+/NZYH4NX,_G[CF^BIBIUUD>1)SUHK/&#O.F\4BE<1TUK<\F7OD"'@IG'M
MFAD2;@S7+ILAZ20DV<MGB+H9HUJ4J+:?DJCR^J/^QO5O#,$5G6\;9M+O3D^K
M:SUT/[UN7=O[7T/3`Z"!_R,T'#,7#[X)#BO_$(D]EYRHS"B+4U;B8*Z8(A/M
MY81NA8>289QP&-T6?P?>[>[4M6[VSQ4H;(]]E2Y5Q@V6@][(QW#?$?]_0`(!
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M'\';PP]#?7+Z_NSP%.C,>:/#HN%T,T@549'K9G>E%2K.SY/LH9!2(ME_`\;`
&LP#7*@``
`
end

Re: Bug in Modules-2.2Beta (fix included)

[Jens H. <je...@St...>]

Hi,

> I've just found a nasty bug, which prevented module unload from working
> (perhaps only when compiled with gcc, had no time to check this). The
> problem is a strcpy() with overlapping regions (gcc -fbounds-checking told
> me, its great) in cmdPath.c. I changed it to a memmove, and the bug
> vanished (on Solaris-2.5 and Linux).
> 
> Greetings, Swen
> 
> Here is the fix:
> 
> --- cmdPath.c.orig	Fri Jul  1 01:17:13 1994
> +++ cmdPath.c	Thu Jul 25 15:32:51 1996
> @@ -363,8 +363,9 @@
>        We must be in SW_STATE3 or not in SW_STATE at all.
>        Removing the marker should be just like removing any other path.
>        */
> -    strcpy(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->startp[0] + start_offset) - oldpath), 
> -	   oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath));
> +    memmove(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->startp[0] + start_offset) - oldpath), 
> +            oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath),
> +            strlen(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath)) + 1);
>  
>      /*
>       *  Cache the set.  Clear the variable from the unset table just

Did you try modules-3.0pre?
It's available at ftp://ftp.connectde.net/sysadmin/sw-admininstration/modules.

Ciao
-- Jens

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     /
 +##+|##+   STRAWBERRY                  Jens Hamisch
+v#+v v##+  EDV-Systeme GmbH            Managing director
/ v    v\v
| . .  . |  Brauneckweg 2               Car (Voice):  (+49 172) 81 04 162
|     .  |  D-82549 Koenigsdorf         Voice:        (+49 8179) 5278 Q, Fax
 | .     |                              Email:        je...@St...
 \   .  /   Tel./Fax: (+49 8179) 5278                 je...@Co...
  \____/    Str...@St...   Home (Email): je...@le...

Bug in Modules-2.2Beta (fix included)

[Swen T. <sw...@un...>]

Hi,

I've just found a nasty bug, which prevented module unload from working
(perhaps only when compiled with gcc, had no time to check this). The
problem is a strcpy() with overlapping regions (gcc -fbounds-checking told
me, its great) in cmdPath.c. I changed it to a memmove, and the bug
vanished (on Solaris-2.5 and Linux).

Greetings, Swen

Here is the fix:

--- cmdPath.c.orig	Fri Jul  1 01:17:13 1994
+++ cmdPath.c	Thu Jul 25 15:32:51 1996
@@ -363,8 +363,9 @@
       We must be in SW_STATE3 or not in SW_STATE at all.
       Removing the marker should be just like removing any other path.
       */
-    strcpy(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->startp[0] + start_offset) - oldpath), 
-	   oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath));
+    memmove(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->startp[0] + start_offset) - oldpath), 
+            oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath),
+            strlen(oldpath + ((regexpPtr->endp[0]) - oldpath)) + 1);
 
     /*
      *  Cache the set.  Clear the variable from the unset table just

Re: Module not loading correctly

[<bo...@in...>]

Modules loading and unloading other modules has never really worked
well; there have always been lots of weird gotchas along the way.
In this case, the "module unload" is causing the TWO_TEST environment
variable to be unset.  Modules is not aware that the two modules use
the same environment variables since you don't use "conflict" or "switch".

I'd use "conflict" statements instead if I were you. 

You really want to be doing a "module switch" for the two modules,
anyway - the proper command is "module switch test1 test2".  But don't
do that in the test2 modulefile, do it on the command line after
checking if the module is loaded.


> Hello,
> 
> I have a interesting problem with a couple of modules in Modules-v2.2BETA.
> 
> I have a module file which test to see if another one exists and if so
> then it removes it and then continues. And the same for another.
> 
> But when I examine the environment variables I notice that only 1 is 
> set, and one is missing. The variable missing is the one which 
> is the same in both cases.
> 
> % module load test1 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK
> 
> test1
> atlas
> % module load use test2 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK
> 
> test2
> 
> % module load use test1 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK
> 
> test1
> atlas
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> #modulefile "test1"
> #
> if { [module-info mode load] && [info exists env(LOADEDMODULES)] } {
> 	set loaded "[split $env(LOADEDMODULES) :]"
> 	if { [lsearch $loaded test2 ] >= 0} {
>  		module unload test2
> 	}
> }
> #
> setenv ORACLE_SID	test1
> setenv TWO_TASK	atlas
> -------------------------------------------
> #modulefile "test2"
> #
> if { [module-info mode load] && [info exists env(LOADEDMODULES)] } {
> 	set loaded "[split $env(LOADEDMODULES) :]"
> 	if { [lsearch $loaded test1 ] >= 0} {
> 		module unload test1
> 	}
> }
> #
> setenv ORACLE_SID	test2
> setenv TWO_TASK	atlas
> -------------------------------------------
> 
> I have down loaded version Modules-3.0pre to see if I have the same problem.
> 
> Thanks for reading
> 
> Andrew
> 
> ******************************************************************************
> Andrew Watkins				      tel: 0171-631 6720
> Unix Administrator			      fax: 0171-631 6727
> System Group	
> Computer Science Department		      e-mail: an...@dc...
> Birkbeck College (University of London)       http://www.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/~andrew
> Malet Street					
> London
> WC1E 7HX
> ******************************************************************************
> 


-- 
Bob Myers                              InteleNet Communications, Inc.
Email: bo...@In...               30 Executive Park, Suite 150
Phone: 714-851-8250                    Irvine, CA 92714
Fax:   714-851-1088                    http://www.intelenet.net/

Module not loading correctly

[<an...@dc...>]

Hello,

I have a interesting problem with a couple of modules in Modules-v2.2BETA.

I have a module file which test to see if another one exists and if so
then it removes it and then continues. And the same for another.

But when I examine the environment variables I notice that only 1 is 
set, and one is missing. The variable missing is the one which 
is the same in both cases.

% module load test1 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK

test1
atlas
% module load use test2 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK

test2

% module load use test1 ; printenv ORACLE_SID ; printenv TWO_TASK

test1
atlas

--------------------------------------------
#modulefile "test1"
#
if { [module-info mode load] && [info exists env(LOADEDMODULES)] } {
	set loaded "[split $env(LOADEDMODULES) :]"
	if { [lsearch $loaded test2 ] >= 0} {
 		module unload test2
	}
}
#
setenv ORACLE_SID	test1
setenv TWO_TASK	atlas
-------------------------------------------
#modulefile "test2"
#
if { [module-info mode load] && [info exists env(LOADEDMODULES)] } {
	set loaded "[split $env(LOADEDMODULES) :]"
	if { [lsearch $loaded test1 ] >= 0} {
		module unload test1
	}
}
#
setenv ORACLE_SID	test2
setenv TWO_TASK	atlas
-------------------------------------------

I have down loaded version Modules-3.0pre to see if I have the same problem.


Thanks for reading

Andrew

******************************************************************************
Andrew Watkins				      tel: 0171-631 6720
Unix Administrator			      fax: 0171-631 6727
System Group	
Computer Science Department		      e-mail: an...@dc...
Birkbeck College (University of London)       http://www.dcs.bbk.ac.uk/~andrew
Malet Street					
London
WC1E 7HX
******************************************************************************

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[Ray W. H. <Ray...@en...>]

I have tarred and gziped the package we use for auto-install
on Solaris machines.  This package contains a basic module
and the module command support files.

It is available at:
ftp://ftp.eng.auburn.edu/pub/Modules/contrib/AUengmod.tar.gz


Also there are old examples of our modules located at:
ftp://ftp.eng.auburn.edu/pub/Modules/contrib/auburn.modulefiles.tar.gz
These modulefiles are automounted to all of are clients.

On the hypermail issue... It is on my to-do list.  We have 
several mail list that would like hypermailed. 

If there is someone that wants to develop a web page for
modules and/or the contrib stuff I don't mind hosting
the web pages.  

--
Ray W. Hiltbrand                Ray...@en...
Engineering Network Services
Auburn University     http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~rayh/rayh.html
   If it doesn't do what you want, subclass and override.

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[J. P. <J....@Qu...>]

Recently lv...@ca... (Larry W. Virden, x2487) said;

me>4) See if you can get it mentioned in some of the FAQ's.
me>   It *is* in the comp.lang.tcl FAQ but this isn't sufficient IMHO.

lv> Do you mean that having it mentioned in my FAQ is not enough places,
lv> or that what's in my FAQ is too small a reference?  If more info is needed
lv> feel free to submit more information.

I meant that it should be mentioned in additional FAQ's, particularly
in the ones for the *.admin groups. If it were not for your entry in
the tcl FAQ I would not have found the modules implementation nor this
mailing list ;-)

Also re...@me... (Richard Elling) said;

me> 7) Establish a hypermail type archive for this list.

re> There is an archive.  But to my knowledge it's never been digested.

I meant an archive that is accessible via the WWW, using a package
like hypermail or mhonarc. Such an archive is much easier to use
than a list server and exposes the contents to search engines as well
as being able to list messages by thread etc. I can provide such a service
however our server/network isn't even 90% reliable and as I'm UK based
that wouldn't suit many of you. However I'm willing to mirror the full
Modules site and hypermail archive, if & when one is established.

John P.

(Apologies if everyone gets this msg, or a variant thereof, twice)

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ?? (fwd)

[Don M. <dp...@cr...>]

> 1) Establish a WWW presence - even if it is simply one or two HTML files
>    in ftp://ftp.eng.auburn.edu/pub/Modules/
> 
>    Keep it simple, like brief outline and abstract. Short installation
>    requirements and a link to the ftp directory and/or files themselves.
>    Ensure it has essential keywords; system administration, large
>    installations, etc. Whatever you think people might search for.
>    Cross reference USENIX - http://www.usenix.org/
> 
I think a WWW presence is great start. I would add the suggestion that
developers aware of Modules also start delivering a modulefile with with
their releases.  They can note in a README that the modulefile is available
for sites that have installed the Modules package. Just place it into the
home for modulefiles.

>    Mention the fact that Cray are using it with UNICOS (in at least
>    one installation anyway). I have access to a few Cray sites
>    but only one is currently adopting it. The modulefiles have
>    definitely been written by Cray and not local sysadmins.
> 
Actually, any Cray site running Programming Environment 2.0 or later has
the Modules package (2.2). It is released with the Programming Environments,
asynchronously from UNICOS.
I did the design for using Modules with the Programming Environments.
We choose to go this route due to the great flexibility Modules gives in
managing the dependencies between the various pieces of the Programming
Environment and the cross-compiling capabilities of our compilers.
It also allowed the local sysadmins an easier method of managing
more than one version of the Programming Environment. Many of our sites are
very fussy about their production environments yet wish to use newer/older
versions of the Programming Environments at the same time.
Modules makes this easy (i.e. module swap PrgEnv PrgEnv.new). We provide
some rudimentary tools for sites to create PrgEnv modulefiles that
load specific versions of the Programming Environment software they have
installed. Every Programming Environment software release comes with a
modulefile specific to its version level.

BTW, Modules is available to be used for other things on the Cray's (even
the mpp systems). It is a great tool for users as well as sysadmins.
More of our asynchronous products will be using it in the future.

Regards,
Don Maghrak

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<re...@me...>]

> From: "J. Pelan" <J....@Qu...>

> 6) Get a few of the main system-admin user groups to mention it
>    on their Web pages, circulars, mailing lists etc.

USENIX and SAGE are good places to do this.  Anyone care to write
a short article?  I'm sure we could get it published in Login;

> 7) Establish a hypermail type archive for this list.

There is an archive.  But to my knowledge it's never been digested.
So it just grows and grows.  This list is handled by Majordomo and
should be able to reply with a digest.

 -- richard

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<re...@me...>]

> From: lv...@ca... (Larry W. Virden, x2487)
> 
> Someone using Solaris build Module packages for each of the Solaris
> install packages that are freely available, and talk to Ousterhout
> to get him to promote the stuff inside of Sun as a cost savings to
> the folk there.

A few years back, John Furlani attempted to get Modules adopted
by SunIR (our internal IS group)  It didn't work, we use a home
grown Depot style setup which isn't nearly as nice.  Getting it
into something like base Solaris would be considerable effort.
Fortunately, there are better methods of getting Modules to the
masses...

>                  Build a Solaris loadable package for Modules and submit
> it to the freely distributable Solaris package archive.

I actually did that years ago when I was at Auburn.  There is a
package that loads /usr/modules to be the default setup complete
with init scripts.  The main modulefile directories were automounted
under /usr/local (== /opt/local)  The idea was that if /usr/modules
didn't exist, then the user would get a very basic path and an 
error message would be printed that the support staff understood.
Since I put the package in the jumpstart script, that never really
happened :-)  If the network or servers were down and /opt/local
wasn't available, they would still be left in a Modules environment
with a suitably default path (no network dependencies)  This allows
one to login and do *something* without being stuck because of a 
path dependency on /opt/local.

Anyway, packages are easy to do.  Perhaps someone still at Auburn
could share?

> Perhaps even share what you can of the various other packages that
> have been built for common Solaris vendor packages like Frame, OpenWindows
> X11R6, etc.  Oh - build some packages for the default Solaris 2.5 environment,
> with a CDE package, SPARCworks, Java, etc.  Folks are going to start
> moving to 2.5 faster and faster - if the environment is there, and advertised
> as making it easier to upgrade, you will get their attention.
> The easier it is for a system admin to 'plug and play' support for
> things like Lotus, Excel, WABI, or whatever, the more likely they are
> to use it - anything that makes their job easier is going to be considered.

Yes.  This could easily be rolled into a package.  Ideally, each
application would come with it's own Modulefile, but that is a pipedream.
Heck, many ISVs still don't use packages :-(
 -- richard

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<re...@me...>]

> From: "Brian T. Wightman" <wig...@so...>
> 
> In message <960...@ca...>,
>   Larry W. Virden, x2487 wrote:
> [- snip -]
> > HOWEVER - if Modules is seen as not being solid, as having weak points or
> > cause an increase in user problems, then you lose big time...
> 
> For example, one of my "power users" that was helping to evaluate
> modules complained that startup time was too slow.  He does a lot of
> parallel work, and the time needed to start an rsh, including all of
> the modules he uses, was obnoxious.  A way to cache your environment
> would definitely help to address this problem.

At one time I did some extensive testing in this area.  The result is
that I now use the Korn shell.  What I found is that the way the
shell handles variables and paths is crucial to Modules performance.
The C-shell stinks when it comes to variables.  It is rather trivial to
do a test, something like:

	time modulecmd csh load xyz

will show how much time is really spent executing Modules.  The remainder
is consumed by your shell in the eval.

I originally did this testing in order to optimize my modulecmd build.
I tried various combinations of static and dynamic linking.  They were
inconclusive because modulecmd runs so fast.

Note: obviously one can write a modulefile that performs poorly.
I didn't :-)
 -- richard

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[Brian T. W. <wig...@so...>]

In message <960...@ca...>,
  Larry W. Virden, x2487 wrote:
[- snip -]
> HOWEVER - if Modules is seen as not being solid, as having weak points or
> cause an increase in user problems, then you lose big time...

For example, one of my "power users" that was helping to evaluate
modules complained that startup time was too slow.  He does a lot of
parallel work, and the time needed to start an rsh, including all of
the modules he uses, was obnoxious.  A way to cache your environment
would definitely help to address this problem.

Since I am not a tcl guru (yet), I havn't taken a look at this.  Does
anyone have any solutions or suggestions on this?

Brian

Brian T. Wightman                         Academic Computing, UW Oshkosh
wig...@uw...                                       800 Algoma Blvd
Phone: (414) 424-3020                                   Dempsey Hall 307
http://www.uwosh.edu/faculty_staff/wightman/    Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<lv...@ca...>]

>4) See if you can get it mentioned in some of the FAQ's.
>   It *is* in the comp.lang.tcl FAQ but this isn't sufficient IMHO.

Do you mean that having it mentioned in my FAQ is not enough places,
or that what's in my FAQ is too small a reference?  If more info is needed
feel free to submit more information.

   Suggest: comp.os.linux.announce    comp.lang.tcl
            comp.unix.large           comp.unix.cray
            comp.unix.shells (?)      

I suggest that you try places like
comp.sys.sun.admin
comp.unix.admin

and perhaps these announce groups if you are announcing a new version

comp.sys.sun.announce
comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.announce
comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.announce
comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.announce
comp.unix.sco.announce
comp.lang.tcl.announce

Add the Mac and Windows environments if anyone has confirmed that
Modules works with Tcl 7.5 on those platforms.

Of course, things may need redesigned for the Mac I guess.  Too bad.


Again, as I mentioned in the last message, if someone wants to make
a splash, they should gather together a nice collection for several
of the most popular packages, using a naming structure appropriate for
the platform in question (/opt/package for Solaris, /usr/local/{bin,lib,man}
for most others I would guess).

Give folk a reason to use it.

Oh - and if this is all ready by July, make sure that someone attending
the Tcl/Tk workshop brings up the idea that extension writers supply
a Module interface for their packages!
-- 
Larry W. Virden                 INET: lv...@ca...
<URL:http://www.teraform.com/%7Elvirden/> is here! <*> O-
Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should 
be construed as representing my employer's opinions.

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<lv...@ca...>]

Let me add another perspective.  I work in an environment where we have
1500 SPARC workstations, literally hundreds of applications, etc.

Yet we don't use modules.

Why?  Because of inertia.

We have thousands of users - most of whom are quite inexperienced.
The system admins are working 50-60 hours a week already, just supporting
the current environment.  It's like Alice running in place as fast as she
can to stay in place.  To change things, or even just to start a new
with a new application, would take more time than they see benefits
on the return of investment.

What to do?  Here's some ideas.  Surely some of you use Linux, 4.4BSD,
FreeBSD or NetBSD.  Set up a Modules environment for your arena
using the default directory names as distributed with your OS.  Submit
it along with changes so that a new installation could make immediate
use of packages by use of the Modules.

Someone using Solaris build Module packages for each of the Solaris
install packages that are freely available, and talk to Ousterhout
to get him to promote the stuff inside of Sun as a cost savings to
the folk there.  Build a Solaris loadable package for Modules and submit
it to the freely distributable Solaris package archive.
Perhaps even share what you can of the various other packages that
have been built for common Solaris vendor packages like Frame, OpenWindows
X11R6, etc.  Oh - build some packages for the default Solaris 2.5 environment,
with a CDE package, SPARCworks, Java, etc.  Folks are going to start
moving to 2.5 faster and faster - if the environment is there, and advertised
as making it easier to upgrade, you will get their attention.
The easier it is for a system admin to 'plug and play' support for
things like Lotus, Excel, WABI, or whatever, the more likely they are
to use it - anything that makes their job easier is going to be considered.

HOWEVER - if Modules is seen as not being solid, as having weak points or
cause an increase in user problems, then you lose big time...
-- 
Larry W. Virden                 INET: lv...@ca...
<URL:http://www.teraform.com/%7Elvirden/> is here! <*> O-
Unless explicitly stated to the contrary, nothing in this posting should 
be construed as representing my employer's opinions.

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[J. P. <J....@Qu...>]

The venerable John Furlani <jl...@sa...> said;

> Comments or other ideas on how to get the word out is appreciated...

I would suggest going about it like this;

1) Establish a WWW presence - even if it is simply one or two HTML files
   in ftp://ftp.eng.auburn.edu/pub/Modules/

   Keep it simple, like brief outline and abstract. Short installation
   requirements and a link to the ftp directory and/or files themselves.
   Ensure it has essential keywords; system administration, large
   installations, etc. Whatever you think people might search for.
   Cross reference USENIX - http://www.usenix.org/

   Mention the fact that Cray are using it with UNICOS (in at least
   one installation anyway). I have access to a few Cray sites
   but only one is currently adopting it. The modulefiles have
   definitely been written by Cray and not local sysadmins.

2) Point a few of the more popular WWW search engines at your main URL.

3) Announce the WWW page & package on a few key newsgroups.
   Keep it down to a screen full.
 
   Suggest: comp.os.linux.announce    comp.lang.tcl
            comp.unix.large           comp.unix.cray
            comp.unix.shells (?)      

4) See if you can get it mentioned in some of the FAQ's.
   It *is* in the comp.lang.tcl FAQ but this isn't sufficient IMHO.
 
5) Get members on this list to spread the word to a few appropriate lists. 
   This might take some co-ordination to avoid undue spamming ;-)

6) Get a few of the main system-admin user groups to mention it
   on their Web pages, circulars, mailing lists etc.

7) Establish a hypermail type archive for this list.

After all that just watch the ftp log files and your mail box fill up !
Be prepared to field lots of questions and persude people to join this list.

That's how I'd do it anyway. Others may have better ideas though.
I can certainly help with a little of the above if needed.

John P.

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[<re...@me...>]

> From: "J. Pelan" <J....@Qu...>
> 
> I was recently made aware of the Modules package when Cray 
> adopted it for use with UNICOS and their mutifarious versions
> of compilers etc.

Cool.  I'm glad to see a vendor using it :-)

> I appears to be an extremely useful tool and one which I'm sure
> many people have thought about developing from time to time.
> Seeing as it is so good why aren't more people aware of it ?

Well, the main reason is that it fixes a problem which is mostly
peculiar to large sites: how to handle user environments with
lots of applications.  Most folks are stuck in either the PC
space (few applications, no concept of multiple users) or the
mainframe space (few applications, many users.)  They have yet
to tackle environments where you have heterogenous systems, 
many applications, many users and applications which change 
over time by adding new versions.  IMHO the latter is the most
important benefit of a Modules environment.

> It doesn't seem to have made an impact in any FAQ (like
> comp.unix.shells for example) and indeed it took me a while
> to find the Tcl implementation using AltaVista.

The primary vehicle has been USENIX and LISA conferences.  LISA 
is particularly important because that is the Large Installation
System Administration conference.

> So where's the catch ?? 

The catch is that a single user system, like most Linuxes, don't
really need Modules: it is extra overhead.  Most large sites are
either flailing, using Modules, using something else like Depot 
or rolled their own.

The big question is: "what does the future hold?"  I've been 
mentally struggling with this for some time.  There was a time 
when a univeral GUI like CDE would be the answer.  With CDE there
is enough administrative flexibility to solve many of the problems
Modules solves for GUI environments.  But the new universal GUI is
really a browser.  And the web, especially with Java applets, has a
new way to solve many of the user environment and application 
distribution problems.  Alas, we still have the problem of non-GUI
environments, so there still isn't a clear winner.

 -- richard

Re: Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[Will P. <pa...@dc...>]

One reason: it takes too long for "bleeding-edgers" to set
it up "just to try it".  These are the people who would tell
their pals, "Hey, this is really cool!" and eventually lean
on their sysadmins, etc...

It is easy enough to build the basic programs, and Tcl/Tk
isn't an problem -- bleeding-edgers are probably running the
latest beta anyway :-)

The problem is the (many) little modules files that describe
the setup for a particular site.  I suspect it's an
afternoon's work to do *anything*, and more than that to do
something decent, or if you are not Tcl-friendly yet.

A simple solution -- which I've raised before on this list
-- is to gather several sites' modulefiles and shove them
under misc/examples/ in the distribution.  Then the
prospective Modules fiend can just copy *some* set, edit a
few pathnames, and be running, albeit imperfectly.

Will

Why doesn't everyone use Modules ??

[J. P. <J....@Qu...>]

Hello Modules-Interest List,

I was recently made aware of the Modules package when Cray 
adopted it for use with UNICOS and their mutifarious versions
of compilers etc.

I appears to be an extremely useful tool and one which I'm sure
many people have thought about developing from time to time.
Seeing as it is so good why aren't more people aware of it ?

It doesn't seem to have made an impact in any FAQ (like
comp.unix.shells for example) and indeed it took me a while
to find the Tcl implementation using AltaVista.

So where's the catch ?? 
Why hasn't the Linux community (who are quick to adopt good ideas),
for example, latched onto it ? Is it because of the Tcl ?

John P.

The best initialization file setup?

[Jon R. R. <ra...@sc...>]

I was curious as to how other sites setup the initialization files for
each shell.  Also if you have comments on the attached list I would
appreciate them.

We are using Modules 3.0 pre-release.  I did look at user-setup at
Auburn University, compliments of Richard Elling, 
(ftp://ftp.eng.auburn.edu) and I think that it is really good!

I will summarize.

Thanks in advance,

Jon



ksh
	/etc/profile
		module alias setup
		path setup

	~/profile
		module add command

	*module not available in subshells unless kshrc setup
	we might want to do this as part of the /etc/profile
sh
	/etc/profile
		module alias setup
		path setup
	~/profile 
		module add command
tcsh
	/etc/.login
		path setup
	/etc/.cshrc
		module alias setup
	~/.login
		module add command
csh
	~/.cshrc
		module alias setup
	~/.login
		moudle add command
		path setup
		

--
Jon R. Ramsey
Siemens Corporate Research
ra...@sc...