Re: [MTT devel] [MTT svn] svn:mtt-svn r1319

I'm not sure what you mean -- I thought they added a funclect, not a field...? On Sep 24, 2009, at 3:09 PM, Ethan Mallove wrote: I think on_stop should conform more to these params: after_each_exec before_any_exec after_all_exec E.g., before_mtt_start_exec after_mtt_start_exec

Re: [OMPI devel] bug?

Circling some off-list comments back to the list...while we could and should error-out easier, this really isn't a supportable operation. What the cmd mpirun -n 2 -slot-list 1,3 foo appears to do is cause us to launch a 2-process job consisting of vpid=1 and vpid=3, as opposed to the

Re: [OMPI devel] bug?

Thanks, filed as https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/ticket/2030 Ralph Castain wrote: Circling some off-list comments back to the list...while we could and should error-out easier, this really isn't a supportable operation. What the cmd mpirun -n 2 -slot-list 1,3 foo appears to do is

[hwloc-devel] Fwd: [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1000

Woo hoo -- r1000! (it's the little things in life...) :-) Begin forwarded message: From: Date: September 25, 2009 11:32:16 AM EDT To: Subject: [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1000 Reply-To: Author: jsquyres Date: 2009-09-25

Re: [hwloc-devel] dynamic cpuset_t?

Sorry for not replying earlier. If we anticipate changing the fixed-size items now, how about adding some kind of version control in the type name now? Or -- more specifically -- what are the exact ABI goals? I.e., if we change the size of the type, will we just require a recompile? Or