Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-05-01 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Tue, May 01, 2007 at 07:39:07AM -0700, Jeff Squyres wrote: > > (b) that > > IPv6 was correctly operating...which were the two issues in this > > discussion. > We currently do not have any IPv6 setup in our MPI testing equipment We automatically check every trunk commit against our IPv6

Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-05-01 Thread Jeff Squyres
On May 1, 2007, at 7:23 AM, Ralph Castain wrote: I'm not entirely sure that the MTT testing would (a) detect whether or not multiple TCP BTL paths were working (as opposed to only one); or They should...? I'll have to check our Cisco rig to ensure that we're again testing multi-TCP BTL

Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-04-29 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 06:07:03PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: > > I have to ask you to remove r14549 quickly as it bring back the trunk > > to the stage it was before r14544 (only random support for multiple > I'll have a look how to accomplish both: IPv6 and a reverted r14549. Does r14550