On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 1:49 AM, Paul Hargrove wrote:
> Responses inline, below.
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:42 PM, C Bergström
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>> >
>> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:
On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 2:25 AM, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>
> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 7:06 AM, C Bergström
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >
>> > 3. More complete patches for fixing the issues. Specifically, the 3
>> > provided patches fix certain issues in some
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Nathan Hjelm wrote:
> The best way to put this is his compiler defaults to --std=gnu89. That gives
> him about 90% of what we require from C99 but has weirdness like __restrict.
> The real solution is the list of functions that are called out on link and
> spot fi
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 9:20 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 11:42 PM, C Bergström wrote:
>>
>> Paul - Is this your typical post? I can't tell if you're trying to be
>> rude or it's accidental.
>
> I believe that multiple
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet wrote:
> Folks,
>
>
> i am under the impression we are being mislead by the title of this thread.
>
> the patches that were initially submitted were enhanced and are available at
> https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi-release/pull/1345
>
>
> it bas
ith ./configure CFLAGS=“-fgnu89-inline” and see if it
> works? If not can you send the link failure?
>
> -Nathan
>
>> On Aug 29, 2016, at 9:42 PM, C Bergström wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 a
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 5:49 AM, Paul Hargrove wrote:
>
> On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 8:32 AM, C Bergström
> wrote:
> [...snip...]
>>
>> Based on the latest response - it seems that we'll just fork OMPI and
>> maintain those patches on top. I'll advise our c
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:22 PM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
wrote:
> On Aug 29, 2016, at 11:06 AM, C Bergström wrote:
>>
>> If the patches are performance impacting I would never burden
>> upstream, but I do hope that regardless you'll consider them. Based on
>> the
EOL
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Gilles
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, August 29, 2016, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
>>>> wrote:
>>>> The patches for master/v2.x will be considerably larger (we have embraced
On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:59 PM, Gilles Gouaillardet wrote:
> Christopher,
>
>
> i made PR #1345 https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi-release/pull/1345
>
> (there is no copyright in these files, let me know how i should credit
> pathscale (if you want that of course)
I'm not sure that there is anyth
t;> was full C99 support. Checking back it looks like llvm 1.0 (2003) had C99
>> support. What version of clang/llvm are you using?
>>
>> -Nathan
>>
>>> On Aug 27, 2016, at 6:38 AM, C Bergström wrote:
>>>
>>> I realize a number of changes have b
I realize a number of changes have been made to make the codebase C99.
As I'm setting up more testing platforms, I found that this caused
Clang (and us) to be broken on SLES10. While I realize that platform
is quite *old*, it is still used in production at more than one sight
which we support. If t
12 matches
Mail list logo
