Jeff, +0.95
Read the new PR yesterday and agree it makes sense to bypass libltdl where it would add little or nothing to a "dlopen-lovin' platform". Forgive me for asking a question I am sure I could answer by reading the .m4: How are you planning to distinguish which platforms support dlopen()? And the question you should have seen coming: May I have a tarball please? If I get a tarball, I will "smoke test" Solaris-10, Solaris-11 and the BSDs before tomorrow's planned merge. I also have access to Mac OS X back to the oldest OMPI supports (10.6 if I recall, but I have back as far as 10.4). -Paul On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 9:36 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquy...@cisco.com > wrote: > Short version > ============= > > I think I have a PR that now solves the libltdl issue. See > https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/410 if you care. > > If not one has any objections, I'll merge this tomorrow (Wed 25 Feb 2015). > > More detail > =========== > > Original problem (can't upgrade Libtool beyond 2.4.2): see > https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/issues/311 > > Solution that we didn't like: remove libltdl from OMPI code base ( > https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/366) > > Solution that ended up not working: manually embedding libltdl in OMPI > code base (https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/390) > > This new solution: OPAL DL framework with 2 components ( > https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/pull/410) > > Feel free to ask for more info. > > -- > Jeff Squyres > jsquy...@cisco.com > For corporate legal information go to: > http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/ > > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel > Link to this post: > http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/02/17024.php > -- Paul H. Hargrove phhargr...@lbl.gov Computer Languages & Systems Software (CLaSS) Group Computer Science Department Tel: +1-510-495-2352 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Fax: +1-510-486-6900
