Re: [ptp-dev] Re: Question about bug 292049

[Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dave,

The debugger uses the working dir also, so that looks correct. I'd  
suggest checking it's passed and if not just use the current dir.

Greg

On Nov 5, 2009, at 11:25 AM, Dave Wootton wrote:

> Greg
> I have code in the proxy already, ifdefed out for now, that is  
> supposed to
> generate the routing file. The code generates the routing file after  
> the
> attach.cfg file is read. The code I have now writes one line per  
> task with
> task index, hostname and the string '7777' (I don't remember what  
> 7777 is
> for). This is only a few lines of code so I should be able to make the
> change fairly quickly.
>
> The questions I have are what directory do I need to create this in,  
> and
> how is that directory name passed to the proxy? Currently I think my  
> code
> is picking it up from the PTP_JOB_WORKING_DIR_ATTR passed in the  
> target
> program invocation request but I'm not sure if that's the right  
> value or
> if I can count on that always being passed.
> Dave
>
>
>
> From:
> Greg Watson <g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To:
> JiangJie <yangtzj@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc:
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Date:
> 11/05/2009 09:51 AM
> Subject:
> [ptp-dev] Re: Question about bug 292049
> Sent by:
> ptp-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
>
> Jie,
>
> Yes, this should really be inside the 'if', but it was moved because  
> the
> PE RM does not currently generate a routing file.
>
> Dave, would it be possible to add this to the PE RM? Would it help  
> if I
> provided some support functions in the utils package?
>
> Greg
>
> On Nov 5, 2009, at 9:37 AM, JiangJie wrote:
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> I'm almost done with the new patch.
> But during the test process, I found a problem that has been solved
> before.
> In SDMDebugger.java, writeRoutingFile() method has been moved  
> outside the
> following "if (fSdmRunner !== null)" condition,
> which will eliminate the use of
> SLURMServiceProvider.needsDebuggerLaunchHelp().  Even if
> needsDebuggerLaunchHelp() returns false,
> the PTP debugger will still try to write the routing file. As we have
> discussed, SLURM proxy cann't provide enough information
> for PTP debugger to generate routing file.Instead, it writes the  
> routing
> file on its own.
>
> So is it possbile to move the call to writeRoutingFile() inside the  
> "if"
> condition? (There is a version of PTP where the call to  
> writeRoutingFile()
> IS inside the "if" condition in my cvs update. When did this change
> happen?)
>
> Regards,
> Jie
>
> Subject: Re: Question about bug 292049
> From: g.watson@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Tue, 3 N! ov 2009 10:04:59 -0500
> CC: ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To: yangtzj@xxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Hi Jie,
>
> The changes to the views look fine.
>
> To fix the slurm.h problem, I've modified the proxy code to add  
> "PTP_" to
> the beginning of all proxy*.h constants. Please update the slurm C  
> code to
> use the new names and hopefully this should resolve the problem.
>
> Regards,
> Greg
>
>
> 使用Messenger保护盾2.0，支持多账号登录！ 现在就下载！
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ptp-dev mailing list
> ptp-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/ptp-dev