On Apr 25, 2008, at 7:40 AM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
We actually already have an outstanding ticket to upgrade to 2.2.2
(https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/1265 ). We were following
the Libtool development process closely and
waiting for at least 2.2.2 (get past 2.2.0).
2.2.2 is out since April 1st, and has seen a number of fixes since.
We
hope to do 2.2.4 soon, but of course if you try it out before then any
eventual remaining issues may be fixed before that.
Sorry -- I didn't mean to imply that we hadn't noticed that 2.2.2 had
been released. I was trying to say that LT 2.2.2 was our gating
factor and that has now been met. We have an outstanding ticket to
upgrade the automated process that builds the official OMPI tarballs
(we have a strictly controlled process that runs in a specific
environment to make official OMPI tarballs -- that's where the upgrade
needs to occur); it just hasn't happened yet. It's marked as a
blocker for the OMPI v1.3 release.
I have been using 2.2.2 on my development cluster since shortly after
it was released (I think other developers are, too).
Additionally, Ralf W. recomends to us that we should also upgrade
Autoconf to 2.62 or later. I've been loosely watching that process;
2.62 requires a newer GNU m4 which we haven't yet decided if we want
to require.
Yes you need GNU m4 1.4.5 or newer. m4 1.4.11 and Autoconf 2.62 speed
up auto* and config.status run time, respectively. For the latter, we
used OMPI as test bed application, see the first set of timings in:
<http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.autoconf.patches/3985>
Wow -- those timings are impressive! Quoting that URL (OMPI is [1]):
-----
For example[1], in a large package with 871 substituted variables, of
which 2*136 are produced by AM_CONDITIONAL, and roughly 210 Makefiles.
'./config.status' execution for those Makefiles (no headers, no
depfiles):
- with Automake-1.9.6: 78.54user 9.32system 1:38.60elapsed 89%CPU
(0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major
+2551217minor)pagefaults 0swaps
- with Automake 1.10 (no superfluous $(*_TRUE)/$(*_FALSE) settings):
56.11user 8.31system 1:16.51elapsed 84%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata
0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (0major+2284709minor)pagefaults 0swaps
- additionally with the Autoconf patch below: 11.24user 3.62system
0:21.89elapsed 67%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs
+0outputs (0major+935332minor)pagefaults 0swaps
-----
Is the "with the Autoconf patch below" equivalent to AM 1.10 + AC 2.62?
--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems
