Re: [Condor-devel] Bug in condor_dagman?

[Erik Paulson <epaulson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 04:41:32PM -0700, Rajesh Rajamani wrote:
> I almost failed to mention - we've found it best to param("BIN") and use 
> the full path to condor executables, instead of invoking them directly 
> as "condor_submit" or "condor_rm".  Any thoughts on this?

It obviously depends on the context, but by and large I'd be opposed
to that.

1. $(BIN) is not required to be defined for Condor to work - for example,
it's not defined in the config file that glidein generates
2. It's nice to be able to fiddle with $PATH to pick which condor_submit
gets used. It seems like param()ing for $(BIN) doesn't give you anything
safer and makes it a little less flexible...

I've always thought that DAGMan should param() explicitly for 
something like DAGMAN_JOB_SUBMIT_CMD and DAGMAN_JOB_RM_CMD, or, even
better, allow the DAG file to specify. (But that's a relgious argument
that Peter and I have from time to time, and I don't remember what side
I usually argue. Today it's that the DAGfile should specify :)

-Erik