On Apr 27, 2012, at 2:07 PM, Brice Goglin wrote:
>> Is there an iOS/android app in progress, too?
> We ran lstopo on a dual-core android phone a while ago. It worked well
> (given the topology info that the arm kernel was reporting).
Hah! I was joking, but that's excellent. :-)
--
Jeff Squyr
Le 27/04/2012 19:44, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
> On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:41 PM, Paul H. Hargrove wrote:
>
>>> Ok let's put a X server inside hwloc then.
>> No, Xlstopo should be for showing me the logical->physical layout of screens
>> on a multi-headed X server, right?
>
> Is there an iOS/android app
On Apr 27, 2012, at 1:41 PM, Paul H. Hargrove wrote:
>> Ok let's put a X server inside hwloc then.
>
> No, Xlstopo should be for showing me the logical->physical layout of screens
> on a multi-headed X server, right?
Is there an iOS/android app in progress, too?
;-)
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...
On 4/27/2012 10:39 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
Le 27/04/2012 19:22, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
Brice Goglin, le Fri 27 Apr 2012 19:09:47 +0200, a écrit :
Le 25/04/2012 15:42, Jiri Hladky a écrit :
I would vote to make lstopo ASCII only and introduce new GUI binary
"lstopo-gui" in the version 1.5
Le 27/04/2012 19:22, Samuel Thibault a écrit :
> Brice Goglin, le Fri 27 Apr 2012 19:09:47 +0200, a écrit :
>> Le 25/04/2012 15:42, Jiri Hladky a écrit :
>>> I would vote to make lstopo ASCII only and introduce new GUI binary
>>> "lstopo-gui" in the version 1.5
>> I'll commit that during the weeken
Brice Goglin, le Fri 27 Apr 2012 19:09:47 +0200, a écrit :
> Le 25/04/2012 15:42, Jiri Hladky a écrit :
> > I would vote to make lstopo ASCII only and introduce new GUI binary
> > "lstopo-gui" in the version 1.5
>
> I'll commit that during the weekend unless somebody comes with a better
> solution
Le 25/04/2012 15:42, Jiri Hladky a écrit :
> I would vote to make lstopo ASCII only and introduce new GUI binary
> "lstopo-gui" in the version 1.5
I'll commit that during the weekend unless somebody comes with a better
solution.
Of course, distros are free to add symlinks as Xlstopo then :)
Bric
On 26/04/2012 08:11, Christopher Samuel wrote:
On 26/04/12 02:35, Brice Goglin wrote:
I think I would vote for lstopo (no X/cairo) and lstopo so
that completion helps.
Not sure if that's an option with Debian given the policy; the hwloc
package would have to have lstopo with X enabled and the
On 26/04/12 02:35, Brice Goglin wrote:
> I think I would vote for lstopo (no X/cairo) and lstopo so
> that completion helps.
Not sure if that's an option with Debian given the policy; the hwloc
package would have to have lstopo with X enabled and then a nox
package would install that variant of l
On 25/04/12 23:44, Jeffrey Squyres wrote:
> FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for
> having two executable names.
IIRC that's generally handled via the alternatives system (or
diversions if you don't like alternatives) in Debian/Ubuntu.
--
Christopher Samuel - Sen
On 04/25/2012 04:38 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Hello,
>
> We recently got some complains from redhat/centos users that wanted to install
> hwloc on their cluster but couldn't because it brought so many X libraries
> that they don't care about.
>
> Debian solves this by having two hwloc packages: t
If we're going to install two lstopo binaries with different names, we
need good names now (instead of plugin trolls).
I think I would vote for lstopo (no X/cairo) and lstopo so that
completion helps.
Brice
On 25/04/2012 11:38, Brice Goglin wrote:
Hello,
We recently got some complains fr
On Apr 25, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> But it still seems overkill to me to use approach 1 while approach 2
> just works. Yes, that conflicts with the original issue of the thread.
> It happens that on Debian we can actually make hwloc and hwloc-nox
> co-installable, by just putti
Jeff Squyres, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 17:11:28 +0200, a écrit :
> Yes: the lstopo user gets whatever the sysadmin chose to install.
> No: the system is not flexible for binary distributions
>
> Meaning: I see 2 ways to have binary packages that have X/cairo support and
> don't have X/cairo support:
>
On Apr 25, 2012, at 11:04 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> Yes, understood, but my point here is that there could be multiple hwloc
>> packages -- one that installs the core and some base set of lstopo plugins
>> (probably not cairo and X). And then secondary packages install lstopo's
>> cairo an
Jeff Squyres, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 17:03:01 +0200, a écrit :
> On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> > It already adapts itself, here. The issue is that the user has to
> > install an X version to get potential for X support. Which brings X.
> > If you do this with plugins, and
On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:58 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It already adapts itself, here. The issue is that the user has to
> install an X version to get potential for X support. Which brings X.
> If you do this with plugins, and you want automatic adaptation to
> whether X is there, you'll have to
Brice Goglin, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 16:58:16 +0200, a écrit :
> On 25/04/2012 16:55, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> >On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >
> >>>FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having
> >>>two executable names.
> >>Well, it seems overkill to
Jeff Squyres, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 16:55:23 +0200, a écrit :
> On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>
> >> FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having
> >> two executable names.
> >
> > Well, it seems overkill to me. It makes sense to me to have both
>
On 25/04/2012 16:55, Jeff Squyres wrote:
On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having two
executable names.
Well, it seems overkill to me. It makes sense to me to have both
xlstopo and lstopo.
Ick. FWIW, I di
On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
>> FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having two
>> executable names.
>
> Well, it seems overkill to me. It makes sense to me to have both
> xlstopo and lstopo.
Ick. FWIW, I dislike having two executables. I
Jeffrey Squyres, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 15:45:18 +0200, a écrit :
> FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having two
> executable names.
Well, it seems overkill to me. It makes sense to me to have both
xlstopo and lstopo.
Samuel
FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having two
executable names.
On Apr 25, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Jiri Hladky wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I would strongly vote to split the hwloc package to the core (ASCII only,
> including ASCII only version of lstopo ) package and GUI pack
Hello,
I would strongly vote to split the hwloc package to the core (ASCII
only, including ASCII only version of lstopo ) package and GUI package
which will bring GUI version of lstopo.
This is also the way how this is handled in Ubuntu - please check the
packages
vim - Vi IMproved - enhanced vi
What about going The OMPI Way? :-)
That is, having support for these things via dynamically loaded plugins. Since
the plugins are loaded at runtime, the presence or absence of a plugin in the
filesystem determines whether that output format is supported or not.
Hence, a hwloc-core package (RP
On Wednesday 25 April 2012 19:38:00 Brice Goglin wrote:
> How do people feel about this?
It sounds like what you have is a conflict between the policies of
Debian (and hence Ubuntu) and the expectations of RHEL/CentOS users.
Debian Policy is fairly clear on this matter:
# 11.8.1 Providing X s
I don't have a strong opinion, but the historical "standard practice" for
Linux/Unix has always been to default to cmd line, non-graphical interfaces.
Graphical output was optional. Of course, that stemmed from the days before
everyone had a graphical display, but it is still generally followed.
Hello,
We recently got some complains from redhat/centos users that wanted to
install hwloc on their cluster but couldn't because it brought so many X
libraries that they don't care about.
Debian solves this by having two hwloc packages: the main hwloc one, and
hwloc-nox where cairo is disab
28 matches
Mail list logo
