Okay. Thanks for having a look Ralph! For future reference, is there a better process I can go through if I find bugs like this that makes sure they don't get forgotten?
Thanks, Richard On 10 April 2014 00:39, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org> wrote: > Wow - that's an ancient one. I'll see if it can be applied to 1.8.1. These > things don't automatically go across - it requires that someone file a > request to move it - and I think this commit came into the trunk after we > branched for the 1.7 series. > > > On Apr 9, 2014, at 12:05 PM, Richard Shaw <jr...@cita.utoronto.ca> wrote: > > I'm not sure I ever replied to this to say that the patch works perfectly > (very belatedly)! > > However I just wanted to ask what the progress of getting this into a > released version is? I'm not particularly sure on the details on the > OpenMPI development process - I've noticed that it's still in the SVN > trunk, but hasn't made it into any of the intervening releases (neither > stables 1.6.2-, 1.8; nor feature releases 1.7 onwards). Will this end up in > the 1.9 series? > > Richard > > > On 24 July 2012 19:02, Richard Shaw <jr...@cita.utoronto.ca> wrote: > >> Thanks George, I'm glad it wasn't just me being crazy. I'll try and test >> that one soon. >> >> Cheers, >> Richard >> >> On Tuesday, 24 July, 2012 at 6:28 PM, George Bosilca wrote: >> >> Richard, >> >> Thanks for identifying this issue and for the short example. I can >> confirm your original understanding was right, the upper bound should be >> identical on all ranks. I just pushed a patch (r26862), let me know if this >> fixes your issue. >> >> Thanks, >> george. >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users > > > > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > us...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/users >
