Brad Penoff wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 3:26 AM, Jeff Squyres <jsquyres_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> I have no objections to bringing this into the trunk, but I agree that
>> an .ompi_ignore is probably a good idea at first.
> I'll try to cook up a commit soon then!
>> One question that I'd like to have answered is how OMPI decides
>> whether to use the SCTP BTL or not. If there are SCTP stacks
>> available by default in Linux and OS X -- but their performance may be
>> sub-optimal and/or buggy, we may want to have the SCTP BTL only
>> activated if the user explicitly asks for it. Open MPI is very
>> concerned with "out of the box" behavior -- we need to ensure that
>> "mpirun a.out" will "just work" on all of our supported platforms.
> Just to make a few things explicit...
> Things would only work out of the box on FreeBSD, and there the stack
> is very good.
> We have less experience with the Linux stack but hope the availability
> of and SCTP BTL will help encourage its use by us and others. Now it
> is a module by default (loaded with "modprobe sctp") but the actual
> SCTP sockets extension API needs to be downloaded and installed
> separately. The so-called lksctp-tools can be obtained here:
> The OS X stack does not come by default but instead is a kernel extension:
> I haven't yet started this testing but intend to soon. As of now
> though, the supplied configure.m4 does not try to even build the
> component on Mac OS X.
> So in my opinion, things in the configure scripts should be fine the
> way the are since only FreeBSD stack (which we have confidence in)
> will try to work out of the box; the others require the user to
> install things.
I am gathering from the text above you haven't tried your BTL on Solaris