Brice Goglin, le Wed 25 Apr 2012 16:58:16 +0200, a écrit :
> On 25/04/2012 16:55, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> >On Apr 25, 2012, at 10:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> >>>FWIW: Having lstopo plugins for output would obviate the need for having two executable names.
> >>Well, it seems overkill to me. It makes sense to me to have both
> >>xlstopo and lstopo.
> >Ick. FWIW, I dislike having two executables. I like having one executable that can adapt itself to whatever is loaded / available on the system. :-)
> >But if I'm in the minority, no problem...
> >If I'm not, I can work on a patch to see if it would be horribly disruptive...
> FWIW, the plugin question may come back within a couple month because we'll
> have an intern looking at managing all backends better inside the hwloc
Well, that's not the same part of the code :) The core definitely needs
plugins, to support dynamic selection between linux & x86 detection, for