On Fri, 28 May 2010, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On May 28, 2010, at 9:32 AM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
>> Understood, and I agreed that the bug should be fixed. Patches would
>> be welcome. :-)
I sent a patch on the bml layer in my first e-mail. We will apply it on
our tree, but as always we're trying to send patches back to open-source
(that was not my intent to start such a debate).
> I should clarify rather than being flip:
> 1. I agree: the bug should be fixed. Clearly, we should never crash.
> 2. After the bug is fixed, there is clearly a choice: some people may
> want to use a different transport if a given BTL is unavailable.
> Others may want to abort. Once the bug is fixed, this seems like a
> pretty straightforward thing to add.
If you use my patch, you still have no choice. Errors on BTLs lead to an
immediate stop instead of trying to continue (and crash).
If someone wants to go further on this, then that's great. If nobody does,
I think you should take my patch. Maybe it's not the best solution, but
it's still better than the current state.