Siegmar --
This issue should now be fixed, too.
On Nov 14, 2014, at 12:04 PM, Siegmar Gross
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> today I tried to install openmpi-dev-274-g2177f9e on my machines
> (Solaris 10 Sparc, Solaris 10 x86_64, and openSUSE Linux 12.1
> x86_64) with gcc-4.9.2 and got the following error o
FWIW: I just committed the fix to master
> On Nov 14, 2014, at 9:24 AM, Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)
> wrote:
>
> Todd K. just reported the same thing:
> https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/issues/272
>
> Siegmar: do you have a github ID? If so, we can effectively "CC" you on
> these kinds of tick
Todd K. just reported the same thing:
https://github.com/open-mpi/ompi/issues/272
Siegmar: do you have a github ID? If so, we can effectively "CC" you on these
kinds of tickets, like we used to do with Trac.
On Nov 14, 2014, at 12:04 PM, Siegmar Gross
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> today I tried to ins
Hi,
today I tried to install openmpi-dev-274-g2177f9e on my machines
(Solaris 10 Sparc, Solaris 10 x86_64, and openSUSE Linux 12.1
x86_64) with gcc-4.9.2 and got the following error on all three
platforms.
tyr openmpi-dev-274-g2177f9e-Linux.x86_64.64_gcc 117 tail -25
log.make.Linux.x86_64.64_gcc
Hi,
today I tried to install openmpi-dev-274-g2177f9e on my machines
(Solaris 10 Sparc, Solaris 10 x86_64, and openSUSE Linux 12.1
x86_64) with Sun C 5.12 and got the following error on all three
platforms.
tyr openmpi-dev-274-g2177f9e-Linux.x86_64.64_cc 127 tail -13
log.make.Linux.x86_64.64_cc
On Nov 14, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Reuti wrote:
> I appreciate your replies and will read them thoroughly. I think it's best to
> continue with the discussion after SC14. I don't want to put any burden on
> anyone when time is tight.
Cool; many thanks. This is complicated stuff; we might not have
Jeff, Gus, Gilles,
Am 14.11.2014 um 15:56 schrieb Jeff Squyres (jsquyres):
> I lurked on this thread for a while, but I have some thoughts on the many
> issues that were discussed on this thread (sorry, I'm still pretty under
> water trying to get ready for SC next week...).
I appreciate your
> On Nov 13, 2014, at 3:36 PM, Dave Love wrote:
>
> Ralph Castain writes:
>
> cn6050 16 par6.q@cn6050
> cn6045 16 par6.q@cn6045
>>>
>>> The above looks like the PE_HOSTFILE. So it should be 16 slots per node.
>>
>> Hey Reuti
>>
>> Is that the standard PE_HOSTFILE format? I’m looki
I lurked on this thread for a while, but I have some thoughts on the many
issues that were discussed on this thread (sorry, I'm still pretty under water
trying to get ready for SC next week...). These points are in no particular
order...
0. Two fundamental points have been missed in this threa
