On Feb 16, 2013, at 11:57 AM, "Jeff Squyres (jsquyres)" <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Feb 16, 2013, at 9:43 AM, Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> No, it's not. RHEL6, for example, does have libpciaccess, but does not
>>> have a libpciaccess-dev (or devel).
>> Are you sure? CentOS 6.3 has it (Ubuntu, Debian and OpenSuse too).
> Per your second mail, I guess I was wrong about that.
>> It all depends on RHEL6 shipping the -devel or not. If -devel is widely
>> available as a package, the situation is exactly like libxml2-devel or
> It looks like numactl and numactl-devel are on my main RHEL6 DVD. But only libpciaccess -- not libpciaccess-devel -- is on my main RHEL6 DVD.
> Here's checking all the RHEL6 DVD iso's that I have:
> [8:52] savbu-usnic-a:~/downloads % cat check-rhel.csh
> foreach iso (`ls rhel-server*.iso`)
> mount -o ro,loop $iso /mnt
> echo === $iso
> find /mnt | grep pciaccess
> umount /mnt
> [8:52] savbu-usnic-a:~/downloads % sudo ./check-rhel.csh
> === rhel-server-6.0-source-dvd1.iso
> === rhel-server-6.0-source-dvd2.iso
> === rhel-server-6.0-x86_64-boot.iso
> === rhel-server-6.0-x86_64-dvd.iso
> === rhel-server-6.1-x86_64-boot.iso
> === rhel-server-6.1-x86_64-dvd.iso
> === rhel-server-6.2-x86_64-boot.iso
> === rhel-server-6.2-x86_64-dvd.iso
> === rhel-server-6.3-x86_64-boot.iso
> === rhel-server-6.3-x86_64-dvd.iso
> [8:52] savbu-usnic-a:~/downloads %
> Looking inside the spec file in the SRPM, I see that it builds a devel RPM, but I don't see that devel package anywhere on the RHEL6 DVDs.
> Are there RHEL6 DVD's other than the boot DVD and the main DVD?
>>>>> +<li>pciutils (libpci). The relevant development package is usually
>>>>> +<tt>pciutils-devel</tt> or <tt>libpci-dev</tt>. Unfortunately, while
>>>>> +the libpci library from the pciutils package is pre-installed (or
>>>>> +readily available) on many platforms, it is licensed under the GPL.
>>>>> +Hence, if hwloc is configured to build/link against libpci, the hwloc
>>>>> +library and binaries will be tainted with GPL (<strong>this has
>>>>> +serious implications for 3rd parties developing tools that link
>>>>> +against libhwloc!</strong>)</li>
>>>> This text is way too long. That section about dependencies was meant to
>>>> be easy to read before a first manual build of hwloc, that's why it's
>>>> a small list of short items. You're adding half a page about libpci in the
>>>> middle, making it hard to read. That long discussion can move somewhere
>>>> else, I'd say a FAQ entry at the end of doxy.
>>> I can see moving it out of this short list, but something like it should stay within the installation section.
>> Move it to the end of that section then, right after the small list of
> Sounds good.
>> We just have to make sure that "GPL" appears nearby each occurence of
>> --enable-libpci. But that won't ever prevent bad users from enabling it
>> without reading the doc. If they don't read configure --help or the doc
>> before adding --enable-libpci, they won't read you 20 lines about the
>> GPL issue :/
> But you might well notice it in boldfaced text in the PDF when figuring out how to install PCI support (because you didn't get it by default). :-)
> Jeff Squyres
> For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
> hwloc-devel mailing list
For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/