On 10/5/11 12:37 PM, "Jeff Squyres" <jsquy...@cisco.com> wrote:
>On Oct 5, 2011, at 2:30 PM, Barrett, Brian W wrote: > >> I don't think we need to go that far; in fact, we really shouldn't use >>m4 >> macros to enforce license policies like that. > >I'm not talking about enforcement -- I'm talking about notification. That's what I meant by policies. Configure.m4 is the wrong place to set things like licensing information; if you want ompi_info to know something about a license, make it part of the component struct. >> But more importantly, we should remove that particular warning from this >> test, since the test is used in places other than SLURM, which don't >>have >> negative licensing impact. > >Fair enough; is there a way to tell the difference between BSD-friendly >PMI and not-BSD-friendly PMI? Not directly, no. It's likely that the ess will need to be PMI + something for many cases, so perhaps those configure macros can check. Perhaps not. Kind of sucks, but what can you do? Brian -- Brian W. Barrett Dept. 1423: Scalable System Software Sandia National Laboratories
