[OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Aurélien Bouteiller
Hi there, has anybody tried to compile ompi trunk with autoconf 2.66 ? It fails when configuring romio with the following error: === Processing subdir: /nics/c/home/bouteill/ompi/trunk/ompi/mca/io/romio/romio --- Found configure.in|ac; running autoreconf... autoreconf: Entering directory `.'

Re: [OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Ralph Castain
It works for me using autoconf 2.68 - I get these warnings, but no failures: configure.ac:1045: warning: AC_LANG_CONFTEST: no AC_LANG_SOURCE call detected in body ../../lib/autoconf/lang.m4:194: AC_LANG_CONFTEST is expanded from... ../../lib/autoconf/general.m4:2662: _AC_LINK_IFELSE is expanded

Re: [OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Sep 28, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Aurélien Bouteiller wrote: > Hi there, > > has anybody tried to compile ompi trunk with autoconf 2.66 ? It fails when > configuring romio with the following error: > === Processing subdir: > /nics/c/home/bouteill/ompi/trunk/ompi/mca/io/romio/romio > --- Found

[OMPI devel] 1.4.3rc3 available

2010-09-28 Thread Ralph Castain
Please give it a shot... http://www.open-mpi.org/software/ompi/v1.4/ Ralph

Re: [OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Aurélien Bouteiller
Le 28 sept. 2010 à 17:55, Jeff Squyres a écrit : > On Sep 28, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Aurélien Bouteiller wrote: > >> Hi there, >> >> has anybody tried to compile ompi trunk with autoconf 2.66 ? It fails when >> configuring romio with the following error: >> === Processing subdir: >>

Re: [OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Aurélien Bouteiller
Le 28 sept. 2010 à 18:10, Aurélien Bouteiller a écrit : > > Le 28 sept. 2010 à 17:55, Jeff Squyres a écrit : > >> On Sep 28, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Aurélien Bouteiller wrote: >> >>> Hi there, >>> >>> has anybody tried to compile ompi trunk with autoconf 2.66 ? It fails when >>> configuring

Re: [OMPI devel] Autogen.pl, romio and autoconf 2.66

2010-09-28 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Sep 28, 2010, at 6:27 PM, Aurélien Bouteiller wrote: >>> This looks like Libtool or Automake isn't installed properly...? > You were right on that one. The system provided automake on Kraken is broken. > Fixed by installing my own. Keep in mind (from HACKING): 2. Build and install the

[OMPI devel] spurrious trac emails

2010-09-28 Thread Jeff Squyres
IU is going to try to track down some of the problems we've been having with the SVN commit messages (not) closing Trac tickets. They're going to clone the OMPI Trac setup and try some stuff. This will cause some spurrious emails to our svn mailing lists -- please ignore these. -- Jeff

[hwloc-devel] tarball growing

2010-09-28 Thread Brice Goglin
The bz2 tarball of hwloc 1.0.2 was 2.1MB. hwloc 1.1 will be at least 2.7MB. I know that bandwidth is free, but I am still not confortable with the size increasing that much. Obviously, the problem comes from tarballs under tests/linux: 605774 28 sept. 08:12 tests/linux/256ppc-8n8s4t.tar.gz

Re: [hwloc-devel] roadmap

2010-09-28 Thread Brice Goglin
The bitmap branch looks good to me. There might still be some documentation/comments to update, but nothing big. Given how intrusive this branch is, I'd rather merge it early instead of fixing conflicts in other branches for a long time :) What I need first is somebody to check my pragma at the

Re: [hwloc-devel] tarball growing

2010-09-28 Thread Ashley Pittman
On 28 Sep 2010, at 07:27, Brice Goglin wrote: > The bz2 tarball of hwloc 1.0.2 was 2.1MB. hwloc 1.1 will be at least > 2.7MB. I know that bandwidth is free, but I am still not confortable > with the size increasing that much. > > Any other idea? There is probably some mileage in simply

Re: [hwloc-devel] tarball growing

2010-09-28 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 28/09/2010 10:26, Ashley Pittman a écrit : > On 28 Sep 2010, at 07:27, Brice Goglin wrote: > > >> The bz2 tarball of hwloc 1.0.2 was 2.1MB. hwloc 1.1 will be at least >> 2.7MB. I know that bandwidth is free, but I am still not confortable >> with the size increasing that much. >> >> Any

Re: [hwloc-devel] roadmap

2010-09-28 Thread Samuel Thibault
Brice Goglin, le Fri 24 Sep 2010 13:31:06 +0200, a écrit : > By the way, what's the proper way to do the latter? > #pragma weak hwloc_cpuset_foo = hwloc_bitmap_foo ? > use __hwloc_attribute_alias instead ? There is no proper way unfortunately: the Mach-O format used by MacOS does not support such

Re: [hwloc-devel] tarball growing

2010-09-28 Thread Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
Eh. Other than not liking it, is there a *problem* with the tarball getting larger? We could also make 2 tarballs if you really care - one with the tests and one without. Sent from my PDA. No type good. On Sep 28, 2010, at 2:28 AM, "Brice Goglin" wrote: > The bz2

Re: [hwloc-devel] roadmap

2010-09-28 Thread Brice Goglin
Le 28/09/2010 11:29, Samuel Thibault a écrit : > Brice Goglin, le Fri 24 Sep 2010 13:31:06 +0200, a écrit : > >> By the way, what's the proper way to do the latter? >> #pragma weak hwloc_cpuset_foo = hwloc_bitmap_foo ? >> use __hwloc_attribute_alias instead ? >> > There is no proper way

Re: [hwloc-devel] roadmap

2010-09-28 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Sep 28, 2010, at 6:41 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: > Jeff, can you check on your Mac that lstopo from 1.0 works with libhwloc > from the latest bitmap branch? I had to fake out the VERSION information, but after doing that, it works. So I think we're good. -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com

[hwloc-devel] Create success (hwloc r1.1a1r2521)

2010-09-28 Thread MPI Team
Creating nightly hwloc snapshot SVN tarball was a success. Snapshot: hwloc 1.1a1r2521 Start time: Tue Sep 28 21:01:02 EDT 2010 End time: Tue Sep 28 21:03:00 EDT 2010 Your friendly daemon, Cyrador