Newsgroups: comp.parallel.pvm
From: ae212cm@prism.gatech.edu (Costas Malamas)
Subject: Re: can't start pvm -- BUG IN KSH???
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology
Date: 3 Aug 1994 14:40:55 -0400
Message-ID: <31oobn$bs7@acmey.gatech.edu>

In article <31jiif$fbt@news.duke.edu >,
William T. Rankin <wrankin@ee.duke.edu > wrote:
 >In article <31bhpd$i56@acmey.gatech.edu>, ccastco@prism.gatech.edu (Costas
 >Malamas) writes: 
.....
 >PVM_DPATH does not need to be set on the remote machine.  It just
 >needs to be set *and* exported on the local machine prior running
 >PVM.  As is described in the Release Notes (?), PVM_DPATH overrides
 >the PVM_ROOT settings.  Thus it provides a workaround for the
 >*EXACT* situation you seem to be describing (ksh users not being
 >able to set environmental variables on the remote machine)
	Hmmm... I did not understand that from the postings.  I havent tried it
either, since in the meantime, I switched to zsh on some of the machines, so
pvm is working on some of them... I will though...

 >Why can't you use PVM_DPATH as proscribed?  Is there a problem?
 >The other solution, and the one I used before the DPATH enhancement
 >came out, was to start PVM with a hostfile which contained the
 >single line:
 >
 >* dx=/your/path/to/pvm3/lib/pvmd
	Hmmm... No, this has NOT worked for me.  I tried including in my hostfile,
a line with a dx modifier as well as an so=ms modifier (for other reasons) that
didnt seem to have any effect.  Especially the so=ms switch:  I am trying to
connect a number of NeXTStations together whose rcmd capabilities have been
severely crippled.  From the U.G. I understand that so=ms would solve a problem
like that. It doesnt: /tmp/pvml* gives a blurb about "expected version"
Hmmm... does pvmd look at a specific port number? how does it pick the ports it
wants? I think we can only use port  >2000 here...

 >|> was on an RS6000, not a standard system or OS, by any means....)
 >
 >now I will usually be the first to crack on Big Blue, but in this case,
 >the criticism is unwarrented.  AIX is as "standard" (if there is such thing
 >these days) a Unix as anything SGI brings out.
 >
 >as far as calling an RS-6k a "non-standard system", I'll just leave that
 >one alone.
 >
 >Here at Duke, I support PVM on Sun-4's (SunOS 4.1.3 and Solaris 2.3),
 >RS-6k's under AIX, and DecStations under Ultrix.  In addition, I've worked on
 >networks of HP's, a KSR-1, and a Cray T3D all under PVM3.  So far, the
 >RS-6k's have been one of the more "well behaved" Unix flavors I've worked on.
 >Of course, I'm an old System-V user from my AT&T days, so your milage
 >may vary :-)
	It does -- not as great milege and all BSDish... hehe... My nagging on AIX
has more to do with the fact that nothing I ever tried to hack into compiling
for it wver did. If there wasnt an AIX version, I was basically screwed. But
that may be just me... As far as standard unix implementation go, I have to say
my worst experience has been with NeXT -- althoough I love their GUI. Imagine a
system that has tilda bound to clear-history as well (Shift-Esc) And that is
the tip of the iceberg... How is that T3D anyway? :^)....
Thanx for your input...


 >Good luck, 
 >
 >-bill
 >
 >-- 
 >----                                /       __/    /    /
 >bill rankin                        /              /    /
 >wrankin@ee.duke.edu               ___  /    /    /    /
 >philosopher/coffee-drinker       /    /    /    /    /
 >                                /    /    /    /    /
 >                             _______/  __/  __/  __/

-- 
Constantinos Malamas -----------------------------------------------------
School of Aerospace Engineering,
Georgia Institute of Technology
Internet: ae212cm@prism.gatech.edu

