On Oct 10, 2005, at 3:49 PM, sdamjad wrote:
I downloaded open mpi 1.0
I tried to install t
but this is error i get when i do make install
/usr/bin/libtool: for architecture: cputype (16777234) cpusubtype
(0) file:
-ldl is not an object file (not
allowed in a library)
/usr/bin/libtool: for ar
I downloaded open mpi 1.0
I tried to install t
but this is error i get when i do make install
/usr/bin/libtool: for architecture: cputype (16777234) cpusubtype (0) file:
-ldl is not an object file (not
allowed in a library)
/usr/bin/libtool: for architecture: cputype (16777234) cpusubtype (0) f
Hi Mark,
Mark Hahn wrote:
There are only 2 ways to achieve ABI compatibility:
1) you impose/agree on a single one.
ignoring the politics for a moment, what are the technical sticking points?
for instance, I have the impression that the linux x86_64 ABI is reasonably
well-defined, and it seem
> ignoring the politics for a moment, what are the technical sticking points?
MPI types
values of constants
Fortran name-mangling
Fortran LOGICAL
program startup (optional)
> for instance, I have the impression that the linux x86_64 ABI is reasonably
> well-defined,
It mostly works. We have ru
Patrick Geoffray wrote:
> The Fortran interface is actually worse than the C interface. Instead of
> using pointers to opaque structures, the Fortran interface may use
> integers as indexes into array of structures, into array of pointers, as
> pointers casted to integers, etc.
I can imagine that
Hi Toon,
Toon Knapen wrote:
If only the 'named constants' are a problem: It's very easy to create a
few functions (like 'int mpi_comm_world()') that will return the correct
value for a given implementation.
This is not the only problem, but this one can be fixed more or less
easily by having
Joachim Worringen wrote:
> Wrong - i.e., the value of MPI_COMM_WORLD is not defined in Fortran,
> either. This won't work if one MPI implementation sets
> MPI_COMM_WORLD to 35 and another expects 626.
>
> Of course, you are right for opaque datatypes like MPI_Group, but this
> is not sufficient fo
Toon Knapen wrote:
Thus AFAICT if my app uses the fortran interface of MPI I can link my
app with a dynamic library (say libmpi.so) which I can make point to
either e.g. an MPICH implementation or POE. right?
Wrong - i.e., the value of MPI_COMM_WORLD is not defined in Fortran, either.
This won
Coming back to the MPI ABI discussion (which dates back from a long time
ago though), just one additional question (to which MPI implementers
certainly have an interesting opinion):
Why don't we use the fortran interface instead of the C interface.
Different C interfaces for MPI are likely incompa
