copr and centos9 ?

[Mark Olesen]

I'm using copr for 
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/openfoam/openfoam/ and now 
finally also enabled for building on epel9 and centos-stream-9 (both 
x86_64).

With the centos-stream-9 I get these messages:

Updating Subscription Management repositories.
Unable to read consumer identity

This system is not registered with an entitlement server. You can use 
subscription-manager to register.

And later

No matching package to install: 'ptscotch-openmpi-devel'
No matching package to install: 'scotch-devel'


Seems to build ok with EPEL, but not with centos.

Questions:
- Should I be using centos-9 for builds?
- Where can I determine who should be providing the scotch packages? Or 
are they just collateral to the subscription complaint?


Thanks for any info.

/mark

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 21. 12. 22 v 16:14 Mark Olesen via devel napsal(a):
>  I'm using copr for
> https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/openfoam/openfoam/ and now finally also enabled
> for 
>  building on epel9 and centos-stream-9 (both x86_64).
>
>  With the centos-stream-9 I get these messages:
>
>  Updating Subscription Management repositories.
>  Unable to read consumer identity
>
>  This system is not registered with an entitlement server. You can use
> subscription-manager to register. 
This is just check. Not actually an error.


>  And later
>
>  No matching package to install: 'ptscotch-openmpi-devel'
>  No matching package to install: 'scotch-devel'
>
>
>  Seems to build ok with EPEL, but not with centos.
>
>  Questions:
>  - Should I be using centos-9 for builds?
>  - Where can I determine who should be providing the scotch packages? Or are they just
> collateral to the subscription 
>  complaint? 
The devel package are not included in CentOS repositories unless requested
https://wiki.centos.org/FAQ/develrepo

The FAQ mention RHEL 8 but the process is the same for RHEL 9 (and CentOS Stream).

Miroslav

[Michael J Gruber]

>  The devel package are not included in CentOS repositories unless
> requested 
Yes, but Mark reports that his package builds "with EPEL, but not with CentOS".
As for as I know, we have the following in copr:

chroot "epel 9" has base RHEL9 and repos base+AppStream+CRB+Extras+EPEL
chroot "centos stream 9" has base CentOS Stream 9 and repos
base+AppStream+Extras+CRB

So, where do the devel packages in Mark's build come from? They can't be in EPEL
if the lib is in RHEL.

Also: What is the "devel" repo mentioned in the centos FAQ, i.e. what is the
proper dnf repo name and which copr chroot uses it? Every time I think I figured out the
EL landscape it gets more complex ...

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 11:05, Michael J Gruber <mjg(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:

>  > The devel package are not included in CentOS repositories
> unless
>  requested
>
>  Yes, but Mark reports that his package builds "with EPEL, but not with
>  CentOS". As for as I know, we have the following in copr:
>
>  chroot "epel 9" has base RHEL9 and repos base+AppStream+CRB+Extras+EPEL
>  chroot "centos stream 9" has base CentOS Stream 9 and repos
>  base+AppStream+Extras+CRB
>
>  So, where do the devel packages in Mark's build come from? They can't be
>  in EPEL if the lib is in RHEL.
>
>  Also: What is the "devel" repo mentioned in the centos FAQ, i.e. what is
>  the proper dnf repo name and which copr chroot uses it? Every time I think
>  I figured out the EL landscape it gets more complex ...
>  
The devel repo was something that was meant to be a stop-gap for packages
needed for EPEL early on. It no longer exists and should be removed from
the FAQ.

I don't see any scotch package in RHEL-9, CentOS Stream-9, OR EPEL-9
repositories. I don't know how this build was working previously.


-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren

[Mark Olesen]

Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8) has this:

ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools

I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to load 
there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces 
powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"


On 12/21/22 17:25, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  
>  
>  On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 11:05, Michael J Gruber <mjg(a)fedoraproject.org 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  
>       > The devel package are not included in CentOS repositories unless
>      requested
>  
>      Yes, but Mark reports that his package builds "with EPEL, but not
>      with CentOS". As for as I know, we have the following in copr:
>  
>      chroot "epel 9" has base RHEL9 and repos base+AppStream+CRB+Extras+EPEL
>      chroot "centos stream 9" has base CentOS Stream 9 and repos
>      base+AppStream+Extras+CRB
>  
>      So, where do the devel packages in Mark's build come from? They
>      can't be in EPEL if the lib is in RHEL.
>  
>      Also: What is the "devel" repo mentioned in the centos FAQ, i.e.
>      what is the proper dnf repo name and which copr chroot uses it?
>      Every time I think I figured out the EL landscape it gets more
>      complex ...
>  
>  
>  The devel repo was something that was meant to be a stop-gap for 
>  packages needed for EPEL early on. It no longer exists and should be 
>  removed from the FAQ.
>  
>  I don't see any scotch package in RHEL-9, CentOS Stream-9, OR EPEL-9 
>  repositories. I don't know how this build was working previously.
>  
>  -- 
>  Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>  Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
>  battle. -- Ian MacClaren
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>  List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>  List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
-- 
Dr Mark OLESEN Principal Engineer - OpenFOAM Development - Services ESI
Germany GmbH | Einsteinring 24 | 85609 Munich | Germany Mob. +49 171
9710 149 | mark.olesen(a)esi-group.com www.openfoam.com |
www.esi-group.com Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Dr. Cristel de
Rouvray - Dr. Alain de Rouvray - Dr. Vincent Chaillou - Andreas Renner
Commercial Register/Handelsregister Amtsgericht Offenbach | HRB 47146
USt.-IdNr.: DE113842129

[Sérgio Basto]

On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8) has
>  this:
>  
>  ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  
>  I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to load 
>  there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces 
>  powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>   
crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository. 

dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel


>  
>  On 12/21/22 17:25, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  > 
>  > 
>  > On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 11:05, Michael J Gruber
>  > <mjg(a)fedoraproject.org 
>  > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  > 
>  >      > The devel package are not included in CentOS repositories
>  > unless
>  >     requested
>  > 
>  >     Yes, but Mark reports that his package builds "with EPEL, but
>  > not
>  >     with CentOS". As for as I know, we have the following in copr:
>  > 
>  >     chroot "epel 9" has base RHEL9 and repos
>  > base+AppStream+CRB+Extras+EPEL
>  >     chroot "centos stream 9" has base CentOS Stream 9 and repos
>  >     base+AppStream+Extras+CRB
>  > 
>  >     So, where do the devel packages in Mark's build come from? They
>  >     can't be in EPEL if the lib is in RHEL.
>  > 
>  >     Also: What is the "devel" repo mentioned in the centos FAQ,
>  > i.e.
>  >     what is the proper dnf repo name and which copr chroot uses it?
>  >     Every time I think I figured out the EL landscape it gets more
>  >     complex ...
>  > 
>  > 
>  > The devel repo was something that was meant to be a stop-gap for 
>  > packages needed for EPEL early on. It no longer exists and should
>  > be 
>  > removed from the FAQ.
>  > 
>  > I don't see any scotch package in RHEL-9, CentOS Stream-9, OR EPEL-
>  > 9 
>  > repositories. I don't know how this build was working previously.
>  > 
>  > -- 
>  > Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>  > Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
>  > battle. -- Ian MacClaren
>  > 
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  > Fedora Code of Conduct:
>  > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>  > List Guidelines:
>  > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>  > List Archives:
>  > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>  > Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>  
>  -- 
>  Dr Mark OLESEN Principal Engineer - OpenFOAM Development - Services
>  ESI
>  Germany GmbH | Einsteinring 24 | 85609 Munich | Germany Mob. +49 171
>  9710 149 | mark.olesen(a)esi-group.com www.openfoam.com |
>  www.esi-group.com Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Dr. Cristel de
>  Rouvray - Dr. Alain de Rouvray - Dr. Vincent Chaillou - Andreas
>  Renner
>  Commercial Register/Handelsregister Amtsgericht Offenbach | HRB 47146
>  USt.-IdNr.: DE113842129
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct:
>  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>  List Guidelines:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>  List Archives:
>  https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:03, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:

>  On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  > Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8) has
>  > this:
>  >
>  > ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  > scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  >
>  > I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to load
>  > there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces
>  > powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>  >
>
>  crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository.
>
>  dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel
>  
No. I do not think that will not work as a replacement. scotch is used for
graph functions and not 'librepo'.

The package scotch and related packages are NOT in EL9, and nothing
'replaces' them. Instead someone will need to build them for either the
COPR project they are using or EPEL.

-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren

[Sérgio Basto]

On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 12:11 -0500, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  
>  
>  On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:03, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com&gt; wrote:
>  > On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  > > Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8)
>  > has
>  > > this:
>  > > 
>  > > ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  > > scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  > > 
>  > > I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to
>  > load 
>  > > there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces 
>  > > powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>  > > 
>  > 
>  > crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository. 
>  > 
>  > dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel
>  > 
>  
>  
>  No. I do not think that will not work as a replacement. scotch is
>  used for graph functions and not 'librepo'.  

librepo is a example of the command 


dnf --enablerepo=crb install scotch-devel 


but I just check no scotch package on centos 9s 



>  The package scotch and related packages are NOT in EL9, and nothing
>  'replaces' them. Instead someone will need to build them for either
>  the COPR project they are using or EPEL.  
>  
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct:
>  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>  List Guidelines:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>  List Archives:
>  https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Mark Olesen]

Yup, scotch doesn't seem to be in CBR either.
Doesn't even seem to be a metis library anymore either. This all seems 
to be a bit odd - how do people manage domain decomposition without 
metis, or scotch (and ptscotch)? Or is it expected that we should be 
rolling this thirdparty software into our own builds?
Not bellyaching, just don't understand the roadmap here.

/mark

On 12/21/22 18:11, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  
>  
>  On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:03, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com 
>  <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  
>      On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>       > Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8) has
>       > this:
>       >
>       > ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>       > scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>       >
>       > I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to load
>       > there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces
>       > powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>       >
>  
>      crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository.
>  
>      dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel
>  
>  
>  No. I do not think that will not work as a replacement. scotch is used 
>  for graph functions and not 'librepo'.
>  
>  The package scotch and related packages are NOT in EL9, and nothing 
>  'replaces' them. Instead someone will need to build them for either the 
>  COPR project they are using or EPEL.
>  
>  -- 
>  Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>  Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
>  battle. -- Ian MacClaren 
-- 
Dr Mark OLESEN Principal Engineer - OpenFOAM Development - Services ESI
Germany GmbH | Einsteinring 24 | 85609 Munich | Germany Mob. +49 171
9710 149 | mark.olesen(a)esi-group.com www.openfoam.com |
www.esi-group.com Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Dr. Cristel de
Rouvray - Dr. Alain de Rouvray - Dr. Vincent Chaillou - Andreas Renner
Commercial Register/Handelsregister Amtsgericht Offenbach | HRB 47146
USt.-IdNr.: DE113842129

[Sérgio Basto]

On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 18:31 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  Yup, scotch doesn't seem to be in CBR either.
>  Doesn't even seem to be a metis library anymore either. This all
>  seems 
>  to be a bit odd - how do people manage domain decomposition without 
>  metis, or scotch (and ptscotch)? Or is it expected that we should be 
>  rolling this thirdparty software into our own builds?
>  Not bellyaching, just don't understand the roadmap here.
>   
join on 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASS...


Attention , 

after review scotch was build for centos8 stream but not centos 9
stream 

https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/scotch/-/tree/c8s

https://gitlab.com/redhat/centos-stream/rpms/scotch/-/commit/510c5b25db89...


>  /mark
>  
>  On 12/21/22 18:11, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  > 
>  > 
>  > On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:03, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com 
>  > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  > 
>  >     On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  >      > Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and
>  > epel-8) has
>  >      > this:
>  >      >
>  >      > ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  >      > scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  >      >
>  >      > I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails
>  > to load
>  >      > there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what
>  > replaces
>  >      > powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>  >      >
>  > 
>  >     crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository.
>  > 
>  >     dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel
>  > 
>  > 
>  > No. I do not think that will not work as a replacement. scotch is
>  > used 
>  > for graph functions and not 'librepo'.
>  > 
>  > The package scotch and related packages are NOT in EL9, and nothing
>  > 'replaces' them. Instead someone will need to build them for either
>  > the 
>  > COPR project they are using or EPEL.
>  > 
>  > -- 
>  > Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>  > Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard 
>  > battle. -- Ian MacClaren
>  
>  -- 
>  Dr Mark OLESEN Principal Engineer - OpenFOAM Development - Services
>  ESI
>  Germany GmbH | Einsteinring 24 | 85609 Munich | Germany Mob. +49 171
>  9710 149 | mark.olesen(a)esi-group.com www.openfoam.com |
>  www.esi-group.com Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Dr. Cristel de
>  Rouvray - Dr. Alain de Rouvray - Dr. Vincent Chaillou - Andreas
>  Renner
>  Commercial Register/Handelsregister Amtsgericht Offenbach | HRB 47146
>  USt.-IdNr.: DE113842129
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  Fedora Code of Conduct:
>  https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>  List Guidelines:
>  https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>  List Archives:
>  https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue 
-- 
Sérgio M. B.

[Stephen Smoogen]

On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:32, Mark Olesen <Mark.Olesen(a)esi-group.com&gt; wrote:

>  Yup, scotch doesn't seem to be in CBR either.
>  Doesn't even seem to be a metis library anymore either. This all seems
>  to be a bit odd - how do people manage domain decomposition without
>  metis, or scotch (and ptscotch)? Or is it expected that we should be
>  rolling this thirdparty software into our own builds?
>  Not bellyaching, just don't understand the roadmap here.
>
>  
To answer the first question about 'domain decomposition'.. I don't
think
it is something that 'most' or 'many' customers deal with. The fact that
the software was only in 'Code Ready Builder' in EL8 means that it came
with 'low' update/support mainly because it had been a build requirement of
some other software in BaseOS or Appstream. The fact that it isn't in EL9
says that build requirement no longer exists and so the package was not
needed to be built at all.

In that case, the usual method is 'build it yourself' or 'work with others
to build it in a 3rd party repository' like EPEL or similar ones. The
reasons for software not being  in future RHEL is usually a split thing..
There are customers who want a specific version in RHEL and there are
customers who do not unless because it is not the version they wanted. That
usually makes the choice toward not including something because then no one
is equally unhappy.



>  /mark
>
>  On 12/21/22 18:11, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
>  >
>  >
>  > On Wed, 21 Dec 2022 at 12:03, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com
>  > <mailto:[e-mail]>> wrote:
>  >
>  >     On Wed, 2022-12-21 at 17:58 +0100, Mark Olesen via devel wrote:
>  >      > Checking my copr log, it seems that centos-stream-8 (and epel-8)
>  has
>  >      > this:
>  >      >
>  >      > ptscotch-openmpi-devel   x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  >      > scotch-devel             x86_64   6.0.5-3.el8 powertools
>  >      >
>  >      > I was mistaken about it working with epel-9. It also fails to load
>  >      > there. So I guess my question has now evolved to "what replaces
>  >      > powertools, scotch-devel" for redhat/centos-9 ?"
>  >      >
>  >
>  >     crb - CentOS 9 Stream from CentOS CRB repository.
>  >
>  >     dnf --enablerepo=crb install librepo-devel
>  >
>  >
>  > No. I do not think that will not work as a replacement. scotch is used
>  > for graph functions and not 'librepo'.
>  >
>  > The package scotch and related packages are NOT in EL9, and nothing
>  > 'replaces' them. Instead someone will need to build them for either the
>  > COPR project they are using or EPEL.
>  >
>  > --
>  > Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
>  > Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard
>  > battle. -- Ian MacClaren
>
>  --
>  Dr Mark OLESEN Principal Engineer - OpenFOAM Development - Services ESI
>  Germany GmbH | Einsteinring 24 | 85609 Munich | Germany Mob. +49 171
>  9710 149 | mark.olesen(a)esi-group.com www.openfoam.com |
>  www.esi-group.com Managing Director/Geschäftsführer: Dr. Cristel de
>  Rouvray - Dr. Alain de Rouvray - Dr. Vincent Chaillou - Andreas Renner
>  Commercial Register/Handelsregister Amtsgericht Offenbach | HRB 47146
>  USt.-IdNr.: DE113842129
>
>  
-- 
Stephen Smoogen, Red Hat Automotive
Let us be kind to one another, for most of us are fighting a hard battle.
-- Ian MacClaren

[Mark Olesen]

>  To answer the first question about 'domain decomposition'.. I
> don't 
>  think it is something that 'most' or 'many' customers deal with. 
Fair enough, but for HPC scientific applications it is definitely a 
go-to functionality.

>  In that case, the usual method is 'build it yourself' or
> 'work with 
>  others to build it in a 3rd party repository' like EPEL or similar ones.  
Ok, so unless someone happens to pick it up, I guess I will have drop 
binary builds for centos/redhat-9 for the time being. Possibly resort to 
adding as an additional source for my own builds (when I find time).

>  The reasons for software not being  in future RHEL is usually a split
>
>  thing.. There are customers who want a specific version in RHEL and 
>  there are customers who do not unless because it is not the version they 
>  wanted. That usually makes the choice toward not including something 
>  because then no one is equally unhappy. 
I understand. This was always a bit limited on RedHat with lock in to 
some particular mpich or openmpi version. Better than debian/ubuntu, 
where they only have a single MPI vendor, but definitely less than SUSE 
with different MPI vendors/versions:

- libptscotch-gnu-mpich-hpc-6.1.0
- libptscotch-gnu-mvapich2-hpc-6.1.0
- libptscotch-gnu-openmpi2-hpc-6.1.0
- libptscotch-gnu-openmpi3-hpc-6.1.0
- libptscotch-gnu-openmpi4-hpc-6.1.0

In any case, thanks for the feedback. It is certainly useful to know the 
root cause.

Cheers!
/mark