Bryan --
You're exactly right. Thanks for tracking this down! I'll commit this
to SVN -- it'll be in tonight's tarball.
On Feb 4, 2005, at 2:17 AM, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 22:53 -0800, Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
>
>> I assume it's a bug in the way the lam_array_t is set up,
>> rather than in the use in this code.
>
> And it is. Here's the fix.
>
> <b
> --- ssi_boot_slurm_hostlist.c.~1~ 2005-02-02 23:00:50.000000000 -0800
> +++ ssi_boot_slurm_hostlist.c 2005-02-03 23:13:37.583030000 -0800
> @@ -69,7 +69,7 @@ lam_ssi_boot_slurm_parse_hostlist(char *
> /* If we didn't find a range, then this is it */
>
> if (i >= len) {
> - lam_arr_append(a, base);
> + lam_arr_append(a, &base);
> } else {
>
> /* If we did find a range, find the end of the range */
> _______________________________________________
> This list is archived at http://www.lam-mpi.org/MailArchives/lam/
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} jsquyres_at_[hidden]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/
|
