Jeff is indeed correct, the compromise we reached was to default to the historical behavior of showing only the parameters of selected components and have an option to show everything else.
PS: Shouldn't "ompi_info --param all all" be identical to "ompi_info --all"?
On Aug 27, 2013, at 22:10 , Jeff Squyres (jsquyres) <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Aug 27, 2013, at 3:13 PM, Nathan Hjelm <hjelmn_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>>> 1a. ompi_info has a *very long-standing precedent* behavior of using <framework> MCA params to exclude the display of components (and their params). Users have come to rely on this behavior to test that OMPI is honoring their $HOME/.openmpi-mca-params.conf file (for example) because -- at least prior to new ompi_info -- there was no other way to verify that.
>> Please take a look @ r29070. I changed the default behavior of ompi_info
>> -a when --level is not specified to assume level 9. I also added an
>> option (--selected-only/-s) that limits the output to components that
>> may be selected. Let me know if this fix is ok.
> I don't think it's going to be enough.
> George's point is that the *default behavior* for ompi_info for years has been to do what --selected-only does. So adding a non-default option to get that same behavior... I think George will hate that. Right, George? :-)
> I think your option 2b) from your previous mail was the compromise:
> To summarize what will be done:
> 1) --all without a --level will assume --level 9
> 2) Either a) add an option to ompi_info to suppress registering all
> components when a component selection parameter is set (ie. --mca btl
> self,sm) or b) somehow mark the parameters of unused components as such.
> I.e., show all components, but mark those who are not selected somehow.
> Sorry. :-\
> Jeff Squyres
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> devel mailing list