pcp
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: papi qa issue

To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: papi qa issue
From: Ken McDonell <kenj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2015 06:53:13 +1100
Cc: 'PCP' <pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20150306211739.GG27936@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <007d01d057ed$6de34160$49a9c420$@internode.on.net> <y0msidi5k2y.fsf@xxxxxxxx> <00a901d0584a$1a1ac2d0$4e504870$@internode.on.net> <20150306202631.GF27936@xxxxxxxxxx> <00b601d0584e$78397830$68ac6890$@internode.on.net> <20150306211739.GG27936@xxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
On 07/03/15 08:17, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
...
Yeah, the papi-tools weren't always packaged with older debian, though
see <http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=papi-tools>.

I've implemented a common check for papi-ness of a platform in common.check that avoids any dependence on papi-tools.

And this works for the platforms that were failing the papi PMDA tests, and on the platforms where these tests were being run (real h/w none of this VM pretend nonsense), they still run and pass.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>