Isn’t a socket or a pipe the right way to address this issue?
George.
On Apr 12, 2014, at 11:01 , svn-commit-mai...@open-mpi.org wrote:
> Author: rhc (Ralph Castain)
> Date: 2014-04-12 11:01:24 EDT (Sat, 12 Apr 2014)
> New Revision: 31376
> URL: https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/ompi/changeset/313
??? How is that any different/better than what was done?
On Apr 13, 2014, at 4:23 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
> Isn’t a socket or a pipe the right way to address this issue?
>
> George.
>
> On Apr 12, 2014, at 11:01 , svn-commit-mai...@open-mpi.org wrote:
>
>> Author: rhc (Ralph Castain)
>> D
Inter-process communications are better handled via pipes and sockets than
opening /dev/null. More generic and it does not depend on any particularities
of the /dev/null file system implementation.
George.
On Apr 13, 2014, at 19:26 , Ralph Castain wrote:
> ??? How is that any different/bet
Thanks. Removed in r31380.
George.
On Apr 11, 2014, at 18:51 , Ralph Castain wrote:
> On Linux:
>
> opal_datatype_unpack.c: In function 'opal_unpack_general_checksum':
> opal_datatype_unpack.c:550: warning: label 'update_loop_description' defined
> but not used
> opal_datatype_unpack.c: In
That's fair, and a good point - I'll change it to a pipe. Thx!
On Apr 13, 2014, at 4:42 PM, George Bosilca wrote:
> Inter-process communications are better handled via pipes and sockets than
> opening /dev/null. More generic and it does not depend on any particularities
> of the /dev/null file
