Skip to content

add new requirements to have singularity for OSG site#5282

Open
yi-fan-wang wants to merge 1 commit intogwastro:v23_release_branchfrom
yi-fan-wang:osg
Open

add new requirements to have singularity for OSG site#5282
yi-fan-wang wants to merge 1 commit intogwastro:v23_release_branchfrom
yi-fan-wang:osg

Conversation

@yi-fan-wang
Copy link
Member

@yi-fan-wang yi-fan-wang commented Feb 6, 2026

Standard information about the request

This is a fix to add a new condor requirement HAS_CVMFS_singularity_opensciencegrid_org=True in the Pegasus workflow when using OSG sites. This is caused by a upstream OSG configuration change shown here. Hence the attribute HAS_SINGULARITY=True no longer implies HAS_CVMFS_singularity_opensciencegrid_org=True. So the old requirements don't actually require the CVMFS singularity image repository and one can land places where there's a CVMFS problem.

This solution is given by James Clark in this LVK computing issue(LVK account required to check the page)

  • The author of this pull request confirms they will adhere to the code of conduct

@yi-fan-wang yi-fan-wang added the v23_release_branch PRs applied to the v2.3.X release branch or to be cherry-picked if merging to master label Feb 6, 2026
@tdent
Copy link
Contributor

tdent commented Feb 6, 2026

  • It's not clear to me if this should replace the existing HAS_SINGULARITY =?= TRUE requirement or be in addition to it
  • It's also not clear to me if these requirements should continue to be in our workflow code or should be put in config files ..
    Hopefully other reviewers have more definite ideas

@spxiwh
Copy link
Contributor

spxiwh commented Feb 6, 2026

I think we only need the new option, but I would keep both to be safe.

The original idea is that all the stuff that people don't need to care about to run on OSG [via LVK computing] should go into the OSG site here. I'm hoping that things become stable enough that this approach works, otherwise we could use config files instead.

@ahnitz and co. can also create another "site" in here if they want to, but I would not expect them to be using the "osg" site directly ... But enough things within LVK use OSG (e.g. PyGRB) that having a single source of truth here is preferable if it works.

@spxiwh
Copy link
Contributor

spxiwh commented Feb 6, 2026

But @yi-fan-wang this is duplicating what is already in #5278 .... It would be good to put this on the main branch as well though, so perhaps we can repurpose this PR for that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

v23_release_branch PRs applied to the v2.3.X release branch or to be cherry-picked if merging to master

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants