Le mercredi 15 octobre 2008 à 20:04 -0500, Dirk Eddelbuettel a écrit :
>
> | Indeed, if you build twice, once with --enable-static + --disable-
> | shared and then again with --disable-static + --enable-shared,
> then
> | you'll get a libmpi.a with all plugins slurped, and a libmpi.so with
> a
Again, thanks to everybody for really timely and high-quality feedback!
On 15 October 2008 at 18:18, Jeff Squyres wrote:
| That being said, this kinda breaks the whole model of:
|
| shell$ gcc myapp.c # produces dynamic linked executable
| shell$ gcc myapp.c -static # produces stati
On Oct 15, 2008, at 4:40 PM, Manuel Prinz wrote:
However, keep in mind that compiling statically with OpenFabrics adds
an unfortunate new dimension of complexity in terms of creating
fully-
static MPI libraries and applications:
http://www.open-mpi.org/faq/?category=openfabrics#ib-static
On Oct 15, 2008, at 4:26 PM, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
We just need a precision on a specific point.
When we use the option --enable-static, a dynamic library is no longer
available (libmca_common_sm.so.0.0.0). The Makefile.am says that:
# 2. libmca_common_sm.la is a static library. In this case,
Manuel Prinz wrote:
[snip]
We may think about some script or alike that does the necessary work for
the user, though, and include that in the package. This would need some
testing and time. Gary, would just providing be static libraries be OK?
I guess we can do that without too much effort.
Ye
Hi Jeff,
thanks for taking the time to explain the issue!
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 16:13 -0400 schrieb Jeff Squyres:
> Static libraries are definitely a Good Thing in some scenarios. We
> have a few features in this arena, which we consider separately:
>
> - building libmpi (and friends)
Le mercredi 15 octobre 2008 à 16:13 -0400, Jeff Squyres a écrit :
> Static libraries are definitely a Good Thing in some scenarios. We
> have a few features in this arena, which we consider separately:
>
> - building libmpi (and friends) as .a instead of .so
> - slurping all the plugins into li
Static libraries are definitely a Good Thing in some scenarios. We
have a few features in this arena, which we consider separately:
- building libmpi (and friends) as .a instead of .so
- slurping all the plugins into libmpi (and friends) instead of
creating them as standalone DLLs
- disabli
Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
On 15 October 2008 at 08:43, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| We had request by a Gary from Sandia about providing static libs, which we
Yeepers. Not sure how that pejorative 'a' landed in there. My apologies to Gary!
Well, while I consider myself important I'd feel even wo
On 15 October 2008 at 08:43, Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| We had request by a Gary from Sandia about providing static libs, which we
Yeepers. Not sure how that pejorative 'a' landed in there. My apologies to
Gary!
Dirk, who promises to (eventually) start to edit his posts before sending ...
-
Jeff, Tim,
We had request by a Gary from Sandia about providing static libs, which we
seemed to have turned off a while ago. Looking into the matter Sylvestre and
Gary found that we can in fact enable this easily (as your FAQ suggested) but
at the expense of libmca_common.so.
Your docs have th
Hi Sylvestre,
thanks for taking care of this! But I still have some doubts.
Am Mittwoch, den 15.10.2008, 00:43 +0200 schrieb Sylvestre Ledru:
> Here is the full comment from the Makefile:
>
> # This library is linked against various MCA components because all
> # shared-memory based components (
On 15 October 2008 at 00:43, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
|
| > at the top of the Makefile under "A word of explanation"). The fact that the
| > shared libraries aren't present, when using "--enable-static" for configure,
| > seems to cause problems for dh_install in the dpkg-buildpackage process.
| >
Gary,
Thanks a lot for actually venturing down this path! Much appreciated!
On 14 October 2008 at 14:29, Gary Hennigan wrote:
| Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > According to FAQ 7 at http://www.open-mpi.org/faq/?category=building
| > it should be as simple as adding --enable-static to the configu
On 14 October 2008 at 22:35, Manuel Prinz wrote:
| Am Dienstag, den 14.10.2008, 13:53 -0500 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
| > On 14 October 2008 at 12:23, Gary Hennigan wrote:
| > | A lot of Debian lib*-dev packages also include static libraries. When
| > | we distribute our application we'll often i
> at the top of the Makefile under "A word of explanation"). The fact that the
> shared libraries aren't present, when using "--enable-static" for configure,
> seems to cause problems for dh_install in the dpkg-buildpackage process.
> After the builds are done, via dpkg-buildpackage, the process g
Am Dienstag, den 14.10.2008, 13:53 -0500 schrieb Dirk Eddelbuettel:
> On 14 October 2008 at 12:23, Gary Hennigan wrote:
> | A lot of Debian lib*-dev packages also include static libraries. When
> | we distribute our application we'll often include statically linked
> | binaries so that users don't
Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
According to FAQ 7 at http://www.open-mpi.org/faq/?category=building
it should be as simple as adding --enable-static to the configure
call to these build.
We then have to look into getting them properly into the package.
We are all a little short of spare time. C
On 14 October 2008 at 12:23, Gary Hennigan wrote:
| Package: libopenmpi-dev
| Version: 1.2.7~rc2-2
| Severity: wishlist
|
| A lot of Debian lib*-dev packages also include static libraries. When
| we distribute our application we'll often include statically linked
| binaries so that users don't ha
Package: libopenmpi-dev
Version: 1.2.7~rc2-2
Severity: wishlist
A lot of Debian lib*-dev packages also include static libraries. When
we distribute our application we'll often include statically linked
binaries so that users don't have to try and go through a complicated
list of prerequisites in o
20 matches
Mail list logo
