George,
about your third point :
some libraries does stuff in the constructors, so "mtl = ^psm" might
also not work if OMPI was configure'd with --disable-dlopen.
as far as i know, --disable-dlopen is quite popular (and
--disable-shared --enable-static is not so much)
Cheers,
Gilles
On 9/3/2015 1:31 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
I might have missed something here but:
1. I bet that, and I'm certainly using a lower bound here, 99.9% of
our users will not even notice the issue between PSM and PSM2.
2. If there is anything that might negatively impact us as a community
is the recurrent screwed-up with our own releases. For a
production-quality software, releasing a new "stable" version every 3
weeks is not being reactive, is being obnoxious.
3. Except if the distro builds OMPI statically, I see no reason to
have 2 build of OMPI due to conflicting symbols between two shared
libraries that OMPI MCA load willingly. Why a simple "mtl = ^psm" in
the OMPI system wide configuration file is not enough to solve the issue?
George.
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Ralph Castain <r...@open-mpi.org
<mailto:r...@open-mpi.org>> wrote:
I’m afraid that won’t solve the problem - the distro will still
feel the need to release -two- versions of OMPI, one with PSM and
one with PSM2. Ordinarily, I wouldn’t care - but this creates user
confusion and reflects on us as a community.
> On Sep 2, 2015, at 6:50 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet
<gil...@rist.or.jp <mailto:gil...@rist.or.jp>> wrote:
>
> Ralph,
>
> what about automatically *not* building PSM2 if PSM is built and
PSM2 is not explicitly required ?
> /* in order to be future proof, we could even do that only if we
detect a symbol conflict */
> we could abort if ompi is configure'd with both --with-psm and
--with-psm2, or simply do nothing
> (the end user might know what he/she is doing, and there will be
nothing to do on the ompi side
> when this gets fixed by the PSM folks)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gilles
>
> On 9/3/2015 10:21 AM, Ralph Castain wrote:
>> Hi folks
>>
>> I regret to say that 1.10.0 is hitting an issue with at least
one upstream distro. Apparently, there is a symbol conflict
between the PSM and PSM2 libraries that precludes building both of
those MTLs at the same time. This is leading the distro to push
for release of two OMPI 1.10.0 builds - one with PSM and the other
with PSM2.
>>
>> IMO, this is a very undesirable situation. I agree with the
distro that delaying release for some significant time as this
would impact everyone else’s users. Therefore, assuming that the
PSM team is unable to quickly resolve the problem in their
libraries, my inclination is to release an immediate 1.10.1 with
the PSM2 MTL removed.
>>
>> I’m soliciting input - any opinions?
>> Ralph
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> de...@open-mpi.org <mailto:de...@open-mpi.org>
>> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
>> Link to this post:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/09/17919.php
>
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> de...@open-mpi.org <mailto:de...@open-mpi.org>
> Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
> Link to this post:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/09/17920.php
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org <mailto:de...@open-mpi.org>
Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Link to this post:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/09/17921.php
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
Subscription: http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel
Link to this post:
http://www.open-mpi.org/community/lists/devel/2015/09/17923.php
