Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Brad King wrote: > Michael Jackson wrote: > >> thanks for the heads up about vxl. I took those 2 scripts and adapted >> them for boost. I have since been able to submit an experimental Dashboard >> to . Lo

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 7:27 AM, David Cole wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Brad King wrote: >> >> Michael Jackson wrote: >>> >>>  thanks for the heads up about vxl. I took those 2 scripts and adapted >>> them for boost. I have since been able to submit an experimental Dashboard >>> to

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

David, I am having some trouble wrapping my head around what exactly is meant by: GetLogicalProcessorsPerPhysical Is that logical per core, per CPU or what? Right now I calculate the value based on the number of logical and physical. So for my Xeon with HyperThreading I get a value of 8.

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Michael Jackson < mike.jack...@bluequartz.net> wrote: > I am having some trouble wrapping my head around what exactly is meant by: > > GetLogicalProcessorsPerPhysical > > Is that logical per core, per CPU or what? Right now I calculate the value > based on the num

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

Bill Hoffman wrote: Bill, I am tearing apart the ParseSysCtl() method at the moment. CMake does not have to Fork a process to get the sysctl values, you can call them directly using sysctlbyname(..) method. I am currently doing this for all the values. I have a few G4 boxes, a Core 2 Duo MacBo

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

On May 19, 2009, at 11:00 AM, Julien Jomier wrote: Bill Hoffman wrote: Bill, I am tearing apart the ParseSysCtl() method at the moment. CMake does not have to Fork a process to get the sysctl values, you can call them directly using sysctlbyname(..) method. I am currently doing this for a

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

Michael Jackson wrote: Ok. Some hacking around and this is the output that I am getting on my Xeon Workstation now. And also there is still some discussion on what exactly is meant by "Is64Bits". Julien, can you comment on that? This should be the number of bits of the OS, but I don't think it

Re: [Boost-cmake] Labels for known failures

On May 19, 2009, at 7:27 AM, David Cole wrote: On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Brad King wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: thanks for the heads up about vxl. I took those 2 scripts and adapted them for boost. I have since been able to submit an experimental Dashboard to

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

On May 19, 2009, at 11:29 AM, Julien Jomier wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Ok. Some hacking around and this is the output that I am getting on my Xeon Workstation now. And also there is still some discussion on what exactly is meant by "Is64Bits". Julien, can you comment on that? This sho

Re: [Boost-cmake] ctest system information on mac

Julien Jomier wrote: Michael Jackson wrote: Ok. Some hacking around and this is the output that I am getting on my Xeon Workstation now. And also there is still some discussion on what exactly is meant by "Is64Bits". Julien, can you comment on that? This should be the number of bits of the OS