Re: [OMPI devel] problem when binding to socket on a single socket node

2010-04-16 Thread Ralph Castain
Well, I guess I got sucked back into paffinity again...sigh. I have committed a solution to this issue in r22984 and r22985. I have tested it against a range of scenarios, but hardly an exhaustive test. So please do stress it. The following comments are by no means intended as criticism, but

[hwloc-devel] Create success (hwloc r1.1a1r1951)

2010-04-16 Thread MPI Team
Creating nightly hwloc snapshot SVN tarball was a success. Snapshot: hwloc 1.1a1r1951 Start time: Fri Apr 16 21:01:01 EDT 2010 End time: Fri Apr 16 21:03:03 EDT 2010 Your friendly daemon, Cyrador

[OMPI devel] 答复: [OMPI devel] 答复: Migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks

2010-04-16 Thread 张晶
Hi Castain I think I should switch the host now in the windows to the linux ,or I will have little chance to build the autotool, Thank you for your advice ! JING ZHANG 发件人: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] 代表 Ralph Castain 发送时间: 2010年4月16日 20:36 收件人: Open

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Deprecate rankfile?

2010-04-16 Thread Terry Dontje
Ralph Castain wrote: To be clear, I wasn't implying anyone would intentionally break rank_file. However, it is rarely (if ever?) tested before we release - AFAIK, none of the MTT tests run by the community test this feature. Thus, it inevitably breaks without detection as changes are made

Re: [OMPI devel] 答复: Migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks

2010-04-16 Thread Ralph Castain
You would install it on the host where you are doing development. Only the eventual OMPI libraries get moved to the target. On Apr 16, 2010, at 12:11 AM, 张晶 wrote: > Hi Castain > > Does “install the autotools under VxWorks” mean install the autotools on the > host or on the target ? > >

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Deprecate rankfile?

2010-04-16 Thread Ralph Castain
To be clear, I wasn't implying anyone would intentionally break rank_file. However, it is rarely (if ever?) tested before we release - AFAIK, none of the MTT tests run by the community test this feature. Thus, it inevitably breaks without detection as changes are made elsewhere in the system.

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Deprecate rankfile?

2010-04-16 Thread Terry Dontje
Jeff Squyres wrote: On Apr 16, 2010, at 6:43 AM, Terry Dontje wrote: If you are suggesting that you will make code that breaks a current rankfile feature, note I am not talking about adding a new feature that isn't supported by rankfile but something that used to work, then I think you

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Deprecate rankfile?

2010-04-16 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Apr 16, 2010, at 6:43 AM, Terry Dontje wrote: > If you are suggesting that you will make code that breaks a current rankfile > feature, note I am not talking about adding a new feature that isn't > supported by rankfile but something that used to work, then I think you are > acting in poor

Re: [OMPI devel] Migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks

2010-04-16 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
* Ralph Castain wrote on Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 05:35:37AM CEST: > I have not personally tried, but I am pretty sure that you can install > the autotools under VxWorks - have you tried to download the latest > autotool tarballs and build them? I don't know if that works well out of the box, but if

Re: [OMPI devel] Migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks

2010-04-16 Thread Ralph Castain
I have not personally tried, but I am pretty sure that you can install the autotools under VxWorks - have you tried to download the latest autotool tarballs and build them? On Apr 15, 2010, at 9:30 PM, 张晶 wrote: > Hello everyone , > > For the purpose to migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks ,I have

[OMPI devel] Migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks

2010-04-16 Thread 张晶
Hello everyone , For the purpose to migrate the OpenMPI to VxWorks ,I have set up a VxWorks development environment with WorkBench 3.0. It is really a good news that the WorkBench supports gnu building tools, bash and some frequently used command like sed ,awd and so on but not the Autotools

Re: [OMPI devel] RFC: Deprecate rankfile?

2010-04-16 Thread Ralph Castain
Read the other "no" votes, and I can understand the points made. I noted that neither respondent offered to maintain this feature, but indicated that it had some value. There really isn't any need to make a decision about this because it will take care of itself. Since no-one is maintaining it