Re: [hwloc-devel] HWLOC_API_VERSION [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1741

2010-02-26 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Feb 26, 2010, at 3:28 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > +/** \brief Indicate at build time which hwloc API version is being used. */ > > +#define HWLOC_API_VERSION 0x0001 > > I was wondering whether it couldn't be automatically generated from the > autoconf information? Sure. What exactly

Re: [hwloc-devel] HWLOC_API_VERSION [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1741

2010-02-26 Thread Samuel Thibault
bgog...@osl.iu.edu, le Tue 23 Feb 2010 02:12:43 -0500, a écrit : > +/** \brief Indicate at build time which hwloc API version is being used. */ > +#define HWLOC_API_VERSION 0x0001 I was wondering whether it couldn't be automatically generated from the autoconf information? Samuel

Re: [hwloc-devel] [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1773

2010-02-26 Thread Jeff Squyres
Whoa; you learn something new every day. I didn't even know that AC_CONFIG_LINKS existed! Let me go play with that... On Feb 26, 2010, at 1:13 PM, Brice Goglin wrote: > jsquy...@osl.iu.edu wrote: > > +$(SYMLINKED_SOURCES): > > + if test ! -r $@ ; then \ > > + $(LN_S) $(SRC)/$@

Re: [hwloc-devel] [hwloc-svn] svn:hwloc r1773

2010-02-26 Thread Brice Goglin
jsquy...@osl.iu.edu wrote: > +$(SYMLINKED_SOURCES): > + if test ! -r $@ ; then \ > + $(LN_S) $(SRC)/$@ $(HWLOC_top_srcdir)/tests/ports/$@; \ > + fi > Random question: could we use AC_CONFIG_LINKS for this ? Brice

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0-rc1

2010-02-26 Thread Samuel Thibault
Brice Goglin, le Fri 26 Feb 2010 15:32:08 +0100, a écrit : > * are there actually some important warnings to fix ? In my memory there isn't. What hasn't been finished yet and to my opinion needs to be for v1.0, is the prefix/suffix/whatever to easily distinguish between physical and logical

Re: [hwloc-devel] 1.0-rc1

2010-02-26 Thread Jeff Squyres
I fixed up the embedding code and docs; it's looking in good shape. I see this in topology-linux.c:1335: unsigned long processor = -1; Which seems to be a contradiction in terms. :-) There's a similar warning on 1426. On Feb 26, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Brice Goglin wrote: > Are we doing a