I know we were headed that way - it might still work when run against the current ORTE. I can check that and see. If so, then I guess it might be advisable to retain it.
All it means is that PRRTE users must be careful to have PRRTE before OMPI in their path values. Otherwise, they get the wrong “prun” and it fails. I suppose I could update the “prun” in OMPI to match the one in PRRTE, if that helps - there isn’t anything incompatible between ORTE and PRRTE. Would that make sense? FWIW: Got a similar complaint from the OpenHPC folks - I gather they also have a “prun”’ in their distribution that they use as an abstraction over all the RM launchers. I’m less concerned about that one, though. > On Jun 5, 2018, at 9:55 AM, Thomas Naughton <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Ralph, > > Is the 'prun' tool required to launch the DVM? > > I know that at some point things shifted to use 'prun' and didn't require > the URI on command-line, but I've not tested in few months. > > Thanks, > --tjn > > _________________________________________________________________________ > Thomas Naughton [email protected] > Research Associate (865) 576-4184 > > > On Tue, 5 Jun 2018, [email protected] wrote: > >> Hey folks >> >> Does anyone have heartburn if I remove the “prun” tool from ORTE? I don’t >> believe anyone is using it, and it doesn’t look like it even works. >> >> I ask because the name conflicts with PRRTE and can cause problems when >> running OMPI against PRRTE >> >> Ralph >> >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
