One “gotcha” we’ve already encountered is that a —enable-parallel configured hdf5 installation #include <mpi.h> from HDF5’s public header file.
Mark From: Hdf-forum <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of "Miller, Mark C." <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Reply-To: HDF Users Discussion List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 1:18 PM To: HDF Users Discussion List <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: [Hdf-forum] Opinion about adjusting packaging of serial vs. parallel hdf5 library installs Hi All, Just curious if anyone out there runs into the issue of supporting *both* serial and parallel HDF5 clients from a *single* HDF5 installation. A challenge I have is supporting this across Windows, OS X and Linux. With a *single* HDF5 installation, the libhdf5.{so,dll,dylib…} has link-time dependence on MPI even for serial clients. But, properly coded serial clients *should* have no run-time dependence on MPI. Does anyone run into any gotchas doing this. Would it make sense to ask The HDF Group to re-package the parallel installation slightly providing a libhdf5.{so,dll,dylib} that has NO MPI references in it and a second, smaller, libhdf5_mpi.{so,dll,dylib} that that has the mpi-parallel parts? A parallel caller would have to link to libhdf5_mpi and libhdf5 but a single installation could more easily support both serial and parallel clients. Just curious if others have thoughts on this. Mark
_______________________________________________ Hdf-forum is for HDF software users discussion. [email protected] http://lists.hdfgroup.org/mailman/listinfo/hdf-forum_lists.hdfgroup.org Twitter: https://twitter.com/hdf5
