Here's what I think VERSION should be for 1.8.2:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/32165
I left comments in the VERSION file as to why I think each version number
should change.
Can someone please verify that this work is correct? If so, we can remove the
comments (before the
Creating nightly hwloc snapshot git tarball was a success.
Snapshot: hwloc dev-163-g4825990
Start time: Tue Jul 8 21:01:01 EDT 2014
End time: Tue Jul 8 21:02:29 EDT 2014
Your friendly daemon,
Cyrador
I got a lot of random calendar "accept" responses (i.e., "random" = "from
people I don't know"). I was a little surprised; I had expected only core Open
MPI developers to respond -- I sent it to the devel list (vs. sending to a
specific list of people) purely out of laziness/convenience.
I'm unable to replicate. Please provide more detail...? Is this a problem in
the MXM component?
On Jul 8, 2014, at 9:20 AM, Mike Dubman wrote:
>
>
> $/usr/mpi/gcc/openmpi-1.8.2a1/bin/ompi_info -a -l 9|less
> Caught signal 13 (Broken pipe)
> backtrace
>
$/usr/mpi/gcc/openmpi-1.8.2a1/bin/ompi_info -a -l 9|less
Caught signal 13 (Broken pipe)
backtrace
2 0x00054cac mxm_handle_error()
/var/tmp/OFED_topdir/BUILD/mxm-3.2.2883/src/mxm/util/debug/debug.c:653
3 0x00054e74 mxm_error_signal_handler()
Brice,
On Jul 8, 2014, at 1:41 AM, Brice Goglin wrote:
> I ignored hunks #1 and #2 (mpich specific), applied hunks in diff.c,
> ignored in topology-linux.c (don't see why they are needed), applied
> topology-xml.c, applied a simpler change to topology.c. Things are in
Hello,
I ignored hunks #1 and #2 (mpich specific), applied hunks in diff.c,
ignored in topology-linux.c (don't see why they are needed), applied
topology-xml.c, applied a simpler change to topology.c. Things are in trunk.
Brice
Le 07/07/2014 20:06, Balaji, Pavan a écrit :
> Folks,
>
> We are