On Sep 14, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Ok -- so if we can build a tarball and "make check" it
successfully on
> all platforms, we're a go?
Yes.
But, tests/linux/ is already 500kB large after compression (it brings
many tarballs of /proc and /sys and the corresponding expected ls
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
>
>> > Does "make check" work properly? I.e., will it return pass/fail on
>> > all the different platforms?
>>
>> It's supposed to be fully automake-compliant so I think so.
>>
>
>
> Ok -- so if we can build a tarball and "mak
Jeff Squyres, le Mon 14 Sep 2009 10:30:08 -0400, a écrit :
> On Sep 14, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
>
> >> Does "make check" work properly? I.e., will it return pass/fail on
> >> all the different platforms?
> >
> >It's supposed to be fully automake-compliant so I think so.
>
> Ok --
On Sep 14, 2009, at 10:03 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Does "make check" work properly? I.e., will it return pass/fail on
> all the different platforms?
It's supposed to be fully automake-compliant so I think so.
Ok -- so if we can build a tarball and "make check" it successfully on
all pla
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Does "make check" work properly? I.e., will it return pass/fail on
> all the different platforms?
It's supposed to be fully automake-compliant so I think so.
Brice
On Sep 14, 2009, at 9:43 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Do we want to setup some automated regression testing (maybe using
> MTT?) with nightly tarballs and across multiple platforms?
What kind of platforms do you have ?
I only have Linux / x86_64. :-\
Right now, make check is the main way to
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Do we want to setup some automated regression testing (maybe using
> MTT?) with nightly tarballs and across multiple platforms?
What kind of platforms do you have ?
Right now, make check is the main way to check things:
* it runs many unit tests to check the API behavior
* i
Brice Goglin, le Mon 14 Sep 2009 15:17:40 +0200, a écrit :
> And Samuel will likely find some breakage on non-Linux OS :)
Ah, indeed, I need to re-test it all on all ports.
Samuel
Do we want to setup some automated regression testing (maybe using
MTT?) with nightly tarballs and across multiple platforms?
On Sep 14, 2009, at 9:17 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Brice / Samuel --
>
> What did you have planned left for hwloc v0.9.1? I think I got in
all
Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Brice / Samuel --
>
> What did you have planned left for hwloc v0.9.1? I think I got in all
> the build system changes that I wanted for the time being (more coming
> later, but not until after the first release). Should we SVN branch
> for 0.9.1?
>
Nothing important on my
Brice / Samuel --
What did you have planned left for hwloc v0.9.1? I think I got in all
the build system changes that I wanted for the time being (more coming
later, but not until after the first release). Should we SVN branch
for 0.9.1?
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
FYI: Because the libtopology web site will disappear someday, and
because we haven't released a version of hwloc yet, I posted the
libtopology v0.9 tarballs here:
http://www.open-mpi.org/software/hwloc/v0.9/
--
Jeff Squyres
jsquy...@cisco.com
12 matches
Mail list logo