Jeff Squyres wrote:
> On Sep 14, 2005, at 5:40 PM, Tim S. Woodall wrote:
>
>
>>Jeff - seems like a configure/build issue to me. Shouldn't we disable
>>numa support and not try to build it if the supporting libraries
>>don't exist?
>
>
> Not sure what you mean -- the supporting library *does* exist...? (just
> not in the mode that you want)
>
> It's LANL's strange fascination with static builds that causes the
> problem. ;-)
>
well - makes life much simpler on bproc systems...
> Seriously, I can see your point, but I don't see an obvious fix -- we
> don't check for the mode of the target library. We just check that
> "$CC testprogram.c -L/path/to/libnuma -lnuma" works properly (actually,
> this is how *all* checks are done in OMPI -- libnuma is somewhat of an
> anomaly because most other packages/linux distros [depending on the
> packaging] provide either just the .a or both the .a and the .so).
>
> Brian / Ralf -- any ideas here?
>
Shouldn't the configure tests use the specified mode (e.g. static/dynamic)?
Is there a short-term workaround to disable numa support for a static build?
Thanks,
Tim
|
![[Flag]](../../../../../community/mirrors/flag-us.gif){kind=small}