Re: [OMPI devel] bug in mca_mpool_base_module_create()

2009-04-21 Thread Jeff Squyres
Thanks! I've committed a slightly different fix here: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/21044 On Apr 20, 2009, at 10:39 AM, Roberto Ammendola wrote: I found a small bug in function mca_mpool_base_module_create() where if a bad name is provided for mpool component, last ite

Re: [OMPI devel] bug in mca_mpool_base_module_create()

2009-04-21 Thread George Bosilca
I wonder why the mpool is so special that it doesn't inherit the logic from the MCA base with regard to opening only the components that match the user input? george. On Apr 21, 2009, at 08:43 , Jeff Squyres wrote: Thanks! I've committed a slightly different fix here: https://svn.op

Re: [OMPI devel] bug in mca_mpool_base_module_create()

2009-04-21 Thread Jeff Squyres
On Apr 21, 2009, at 10:51 AM, George Bosilca wrote: I wonder why the mpool is so special that it doesn't inherit the logic from the MCA base with regard to opening only the components that match the user input? Note the commit message: Correctly check for the case where we didn't find the mp

[OMPI devel] Fwd: RFC: proposed GPLv3 license exception draft

2009-04-21 Thread Jeff Squyres
IANAL and don't understand most of what is listed below. If the GNU Autotools go to GPL3, will we be unable to upgrade beyond the last versions that are GPL2? I see the phrase "we still want to allow people to distribute the normal output of Autoconf under any license they want", but I'm w