[OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-04-29 Thread Adrian Knoth
Hi, especially bosilca (George?) r14544 broke the IPv6 support (see Ticket #1008). I've committed a quick patch, but I guess we (George and me?) will have to look closer in order to provide the desired functionality. There's another question concerning r14544: why did you change sockaddr_storage*

Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-04-29 Thread George Bosilca
It's against my "religion" to back off someone else commit. First I try to understand why and how to fix it. After the IPv6 commit, it took me 2 days to bring the trunk back to the stage where it was before (i.e. restore the lost functionality). I have to ask you to remove r14549 quickly as

Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-04-29 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 10:18:01AM -0400, George Bosilca wrote: > I have to ask you to remove r14549 quickly as it bring back the trunk > to the stage it was before r14544 (only random support for multiple I'll have a look how to accomplish both: IPv6 and a reverted r14549. > BTL). It's not

Re: [OMPI devel] sockaddr* vs. sockaddr_storage*

2007-04-29 Thread Adrian Knoth
On Sun, Apr 29, 2007 at 06:07:03PM +0200, Adrian Knoth wrote: > > I have to ask you to remove r14549 quickly as it bring back the trunk > > to the stage it was before r14544 (only random support for multiple > I'll have a look how to accomplish both: IPv6 and a reverted r14549. Does r14550 sa