Newsgroups: comp.parallel.pvm
From: Tudor Buican <tudor@workhorse.timb.com>
Subject: Windows users are becoming desperate!
Organization: Rt66.COM, Public Internet Access in New Mexico
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 1996 19:34:08 -0600
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <31705610.49FA@workhorse.timb.com>

It just struck me that virtually all the postings 
that have to do with PVM for Windows are cries for 
help from people mystified by a non-standard, 
temperamental, undocumented and TOTALLY 
unsupported port, i.e. WPVM. Having myself refused 
to give up and shoot my monitor, I came up with a 
few pieces of advice for would-be WPVM users, which 
I posted to this newsgroup. However, I am the first 
to admit that my advice sounded more like mystical 
incantations than installation and configuration 
instructions. 

The fact that there are people who still insist on 
using WPVM simply shows how badly needed a good, 
honest-to-God Windows port of PVM really is! I know 
of one guy who is working on such a port, and he 
seems to be doing it the right way. Markus, will 
you finish your port and make it available to the 
rest of us, please? After all, we, too, would like 
to work on PVM applications, rather than on fixes 
and workarounds.

Given the number of PCs, one could say that a good 
Windows PVM port will contribute more to the 
advance of high (or, at least, reasonable) 
performance computing than ports to any other 
operating system. For example, I am using a piece 
of software (which shall remain unnamed) that does 
great things but at a snail's pace. Having written 
a PVM interface that allows me to run it 
transparently on multiple PCs, the performance has 
finally reached the point where this program is 
really useful. 

Give us a good PVM port and the PC world will never 
be the same again!

Tudor
Home Supercomputing, Inc. (Just joking!)

