Re: 2.11 how to remove charmrun remote-shell options

From: Jim Phillips (jim_at_ks.uiuc.edu)
Date: Tue Dec 20 2016 - 23:29:12 CST

It looks like this all started here:

https://charm.cs.illinois.edu/redmine/issues/709

https://charm.cs.illinois.edu/gerrit/gitweb?p=charm.git;a=commitdiff;h=17943b438e1862cc9d3622fcde2ce79f7e241c74

Not the most flexible solution, but OpenSSH is ubiquitous these days.

Your options for using rsh are:

1) Use "++remote-shell /path/to/myrsh" where myrsh is a script that calls
rsh correctly, e.g.: exec rsh $1 /bin/bash -f

2) If you have a working mpiexec on your system, use ++mpiexec.

Jim

On Tue, 20 Dec 2016, Scott Brozell wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This problem that charmrun now passes openssh options still exists in
> 2.12b1 according to a quick check with the download:
> NAMD_2.12b1_Linux-x86_64-ibverbs
>
> scott
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 01:04:54PM -0500, Scott Brozell wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> A batch script that works correctly with previous versions of NAMD,
>> 2.10, etc., is failing with 2.11.
>>
>> The initial error is due to a charmrun change to ssh for the default remote shell:
>> Host key verification failed.
>> Charmrun> Error 255 returned from remote shell (n72:0)
>> ..
>>
>> Using ++remote-shell rsh or export CONV_RSH=rsh yields the same new failure:
>> n75: invalid option -- 'o'
>> usage: rsh [-nd] [-l login] host [command]
>> Charmrun> Error 1 returned from remote shell (n75:0)
>> ..
>>
>> Digging deeper the problem is that charmrun now passes openssh options:
>> Charmrun> Starting rsh n75 -l me -o KbdInteractiveAuthentication=no -o PasswordAuthentication=no -o NoHostAuthenticationForLocalhost=yes /bin/bash -f
>> ..
>>
>> For reference in 2.10:
>> Charmrun> Starting rsh n19 -l me /bin/bash -f
>>
>> How can these invalid options be eliminated ?
>>
>>
>> FWIW,
>> This page doesn't contain a version or a change log that would show
>> changes to defaults or show the need to tinker with the remote shell stuff:
>> http://charm.cs.illinois.edu/manuals/html/charm++/C.html
>> This page is clearly stale:
>> http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/wiki/index.cgi?NamdKnownBugs
>> This page is not as clearly stale; how about a date stamp or some other
>> obvious clue that it is being maintained?
>> http://www.ks.uiuc.edu/Research/namd/wiki/index.cgi?NamdTroubleshooting
>>
>> I recommend that your quality assurance and quality control processes
>> be reviewed.
>>
>> thanks,
>> scott
>>
>

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sun Dec 31 2017 - 23:20:54 CST