On Mar 6, 2014, at 4:08 AM, Vasily Filipov <vas...@dev.mellanox.co.il> wrote:
>> #if HAVE_DECL_AF_IB >> rc = try_using_af_ib(); >> if (OMPI_ERR_NOT_AVAILABLE == rc) { >> rc = try_the_other_way(); >> } >> #else >> rc = try_the_other_way(); >> #endif > I mean I cannot use "another way" if func call for "try_using_af_ib" > fails (call for "try_the_other_way()") because RDMACM was compiled for AF_IB > usage (different fields in structs, different functions prototypes). Ok, that means the implementation is reduced to: #if HAVE_DECL_AF_IB rc = try_using_af_ib(); #else rc = try_the_other_way(); #endif Right? If so, I don't see why you need the AC_TRY_RUN -- if RDMACM is easily detectable as to which way it is compiled (because it has, for example, different fields), then AC_CHECK_DECLS should be enough, right? I must be missing something...? -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/