On 12:19 Sun 27 Jul , Tziporet Koren wrote: > Betsy Zeller wrote: >> >From what I've heard, there are currently applications using: >> - libopensm >> - libosmcomp >> - libosmvendor >> - libibcommon >> Now that it is well understood that these libraries are intended to be >> private, developers can move away from using them. But, in the meantime >> it would be helpful if any major planned changes in these could be >> posted to the list. >> > Sasha - please comment on the request from Betsy
Sure, we are posting even minor changes :) . Basically I'm fine if developers use (or will use) those libraries, important point is that they should not expect "stable API" there. >> I've also heard it suggested that it would be easier to avoid some >> issues with private libraries if they were not in the standard compiler >> search path. There are pros and cons to deciding to move them, but I >> thought I would mention the suggestion. >> >> > Library owners: Any thoughts here? I don't like this idea (as well as this word - "private" :)). Some packages in OFED already share those libraries (for instance ibutils uses libopensm, etc.). Also somebody may want to use it - let people to decide. Sasha _______________________________________________ ewg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ewg
