Can you send me your config.log and the stdout/stderr from configure?
On Jun 25, 2012, at 4:45 PM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> Thanks. That explains one mystery.
>
> I'm still unclear, though. Or, maybe I'm hitting a different problem. I
> configure with "--with-openib" (along with other stuff). I
Thanks. That explains one mystery.
I'm still unclear, though. Or, maybe I'm hitting a different problem.
I configure with "--with-openib" (along with other stuff). I get:
r26639:checking if MCA component btl:openib can compile... yes
r26640:checking if MCA component btl:openib can
Er... I could have sworn that I committed the fix before I sent this mail, but
it looks like I didn't. I just committed r26654 which fixes the issue.
Sorry for the confusion!
On Jun 25, 2012, at 2:47 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> I noticed earlier today that the trunk openib btl was not building
I noticed earlier today that the trunk openib btl was not building if you did
not specify --with-openib[=DIR].
I have fixed the problem, but just wanted to give a heads up that this has
happened; either re-configure --with-openib or svn up and
re-autogen/configure/build.
Sorry about that,
Hi all -
As a reminder, we're going to be discussing supported components for 1.7 at the
teleconference tomorrow. There are a number of components that are currently
lacking a maintainer; please consider signing up to help distribute the load
across all OMPI participants.
Thanks,
Brian &
What version?
On Jun 25, 2012, at 9:53 AM, ludovic.hab...@ext.bull.net wrote:
> Hi everybody,
>
> I'm facing a problem in orte/oob/tcp/, more particularly in file
> oob_tcp_msg.c. Some network interruptions were making my program hanging and
> not crashing (a basic helloworld).
>
> Thus, I
Hi everybody,
I'm facing a problem in orte/oob/tcp/, more particularly in file oob_tcp_msg.c.
Some network interruptions were making my program hanging and not crashing (a
basic helloworld).
Thus, I reproduced the problem with gdb, by simulating an error on read
(jumping from line 357 to 367,
These should now be fixed. Sorry about that!
On Jun 25, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> In tarball 26642, Fortran compilation no longer succeeds. I suspect the
> problem might be 26641. E.g.,
>
> libmpi_usempif08.so:
> undefined reference to `ompi_iscan_f'
> libmpi_mpifh.so:
>
I'll test out the patch once the test machine is available again.
--td
On 6/25/2012 3:42 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
Hello Terry,
Here's a patch that should help. It cleans the code and makes all arrays
dynamic. I artificially set the initial array sizes to 4 to experience
the code on our 24-way
Sorry; I thought I had all of these squashed already. :-(
I'll fix.
On Jun 25, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Eugene Loh wrote:
> In tarball 26642, Fortran compilation no longer succeeds. I suspect the
> problem might be 26641. E.g.,
>
> libmpi_usempif08.so:
> undefined reference to `ompi_iscan_f'
>
On 6/25/2012 10:12 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:44 AM, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
Hmmm, I guess I could see the thinking of tying ofud and openib btls
configuring together. However it seems inconsistent to me that one btl doesn't
allow you to control configuring it in or not
In tarball 26642, Fortran compilation no longer succeeds. I suspect the
problem might be 26641. E.g.,
libmpi_usempif08.so:
undefined reference to `ompi_iscan_f'
libmpi_mpifh.so:
undefined reference to `MPI_Reduce_scatter_block'
libmpi_mpifh.so:
undefined reference to
On Jun 25, 2012, at 5:44 AM, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
> Hmmm, I guess I could see the thinking of tying ofud and openib btls
> configuring together. However it seems inconsistent to me that one btl
> doesn't allow you to control configuring it in or not directly. What if I
> really do not want to
Just a reminder that this change is headed for the trunk tomorrow
afternoon/evening. We will discuss it on the teleconf, but if you have
cycles to test please do so.
Thanks,
Josh
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Josh Hursey wrote:
> In response to some early feedback, I
On 6/23/2012 6:32 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Jun 22, 2012, at 11:26 PM, TERRY DONTJE wrote:
4. The behavior of --with[out]-verbs is as was described in a prior mail:
- if --with-verbs is specified, all 3 verbs-based components must succeed
- if --without-verbs is specified, all 4
Hello Terry,
Here's a patch that should help. It cleans the code and makes all arrays
dynamic. I artificially set the initial array sizes to 4 to experience
the code on our 24-way T1 machine. I will set it to 256 or so in the
final commit. Please let me know if it helps on your 1440-way machine.
16 matches
Mail list logo