On Oct 11, 2007, at 5:17 PM, George Bosilca wrote:

I know that [with few exception] nobody cares about our Windows support, but we finally have a working Open MPI software stack there and this approach will definitively break our "Unix like" friendliness on Windows.

As a temporary solution and until we can figure out how many people use mpicc (and friends) on Windows, I suggest we keep around the old wrapper compilers, together with the new shell scripts.

Sounds reasonable. It would not be [too] difficult to have the build system do the following:

- install the binaries to mpicc.exe (and friends)
- install the shell scripts to mpicc.sh (or mpicc.pl or whatever suffix is appropriate for the scripting language that is used) - make sym links from $bindir/mpicc to $bindir/mpicc.sh (as the default), or $bindir/mpicc to $bindir/mpicc.exe if building or windows (or explicitly asked for via a configure --with kind of option)

Hence, everyone will see "mpicc", but the back-end technology may be different.


  Thanks,
    george.

On Oct 11, 2007, at 3:51 PM, Richard Graham wrote:

What: Change the mpicc/mpicxx/mpif77/mpif90 from being binaries to being
shell scripts

Why: Our build environment assumes that wrapper compilers will use the same binary format that the Open MPI libraries do. In cross-compile environment, the MPI wrapper compilers will run on the front-end and need to run on the front-end, and not the back-end. Jeff has suggested this as the simplest
way to build back-end libraries, and front-end wrapper-compilers.

When: within the next several weeks (for the 1.3 release)

Timeout: 10/19/2007


Rich

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel

_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
de...@open-mpi.org
http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel


--
Jeff Squyres
Cisco Systems

Reply via email to