I reran the build as Ralf requested (setting
shlibpath_overrides_runpath=yes in the libtool script).
The build and check were SUCCESSful!
I have provided Ralf with the requested files off-list.
-Paul
Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
* Paul H. Hargrove wrote on Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 03:54:54AM CEST:
I have built both 1.4.3rc1 and 1.5rc5 using the 3.2 PathScale compilers.
I did not encounter the problem Larry reported, but there are (at least)
2 differences between my build and Larry's
1) I didn't pass and explicit {C,CXX,F,FC}FLAGS
2) My pathcc install is using the gcc4 toolchain, not gcc3
The one line change below fixes a problem with the portable_platform
header with respect to PathScale compilers that lack a patchlevel. For
instance, the 3.2 version I have defines __PATHCC_PATCHLEVEL__ to be empty.
I am the maintainer of GASNet's portable_platform.h from which Open
MPI's equ
You can always disable vampir trace in OMPI:
./configure --enable-contrib-no-build=vt
That will avoid building this optional component and therefore you won't run
into this compiler issue.
On Aug 27, 2010, at 5:18 PM, Larry Baker wrote:
> The PathScale 3.2 C++ compiler segment faults for
Among the tests I conducted but did not report was a successful build of
1.5rc5 with the PathScale "3.2.99" compilers.
$ pathcc --version
PathScale(TM) Compiler Suite: Version 3.2.99
Built on: 2009-08-21 13:23:57 -0500
Thread model: posix
GNU gcc version 4.2.0 (PathScale 3.2.99 driver)
Copyright
The PathScale 3.2 C++ compiler segment faults for optimization levels
higher than -O1 (-O2 is the default). This is for OpenMPI 1.4.2 — my
first attempt to compile using the PathScale compilers. I could not
find any -WOPT options to eliminate the error. I don't understand the
current sta
Jeff,
Sure, I need to register to file the tickets.
I have not had a chance yet. I will try to look at them first thing next week.
Scott
On Aug 27, 2010, at 2:41 PM, Jeff Squyres wrote:
> Scott --
>
> Can you file tickets for this against 1.4 and 1.5? These should probably be
> blockers.
>
Has anybody tested runs of the current release candidates on Quadrics Elan4?
I have successfully built for Elan4 on a system with the headers and
libs, but no hardware and thus no runs.
I can try running on a cluster with actual Quadrics hardware nobody else
has done so. Let me know.
-Paul
P
Scott --
Can you file tickets for this against 1.4 and 1.5? These should probably be
blockers.
Have you been able to track these down any further, perchance?
On Aug 26, 2010, at 10:38 AM, Scott Atchley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Testing 1.5rc5 over MX with the same setup as 1.4.3rc1 (RHEL 5.4 and
All instances will be fixed on the SVN trunk in a commit coming in a few hours
(delaying autogen-worthy changes during the business day). Shame on us for
using AS_VAR_GET.
CMR's for v1.5 coming tonight; CMR for v1.4 (because it's a different patch) is
here:
https://svn.open-mpi.org/trac/o
Rolf,
Thanks, your explanation makes sense (intersection of ILP32 and V9 ISA
yields V8+ ABI).
When updating the README, please also consider my posting regarding the
recommended flags for the Sun C compiler, which are causing warnings
from recent Sun compilers:
http://www.open-mpi.org/comm
* Paul H. Hargrove wrote on Fri, Aug 27, 2010 at 03:54:54AM CEST:
> >I am now looking at using IBM's XLC compilers for ILP32 builds on
> >the same Linux/PPC64 platform for which I've reported some
> >XLC/LP64 bugs.
> >
> >What I find now is that "make check" is failing with the loader
> >unable to
Paul, I believe you are right. I was referencing information from here
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/SPARC-Options.html From this site, I
also read the following:
"With -mv8plus, GCC generates code for the SPARC-V8+ ABI. The difference
from the V8 ABI is that the global and out registers
As per the RFC below, I'll begin rolling these changes into the trunk over the
next week.
> WHAT: Begin the process of introducing threads and thread safety into ORTE
>
> WHY: ORTE is becoming increasingly dependent on thread-safe operations
> (lock, cond_wait, unlock). However, OPAL
I have found a system that is triggering two (new as far as I can tell)
failure modes in opal_path_nfs().
This is a Linux/PPC64 host, but NOT the BG/P front-end I've been
reporting other issues with.
This is also with gcc, not XLC. So, this is a "normal" Linux/PPC system.
I'll provide platfor
15 matches
Mail list logo
