This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
On Nov 3, 2008, at 3:36 PM, Gustavo Seabra wrote:
>> For your fortran issue, the Fortran 90 interface needs the Fortran 77
>> interface. So you need to supply an F77 as well (the output from
>> should indicate that the F90 interface was disabled because the F77
>> interface was disabled).
> Is that what you mean (see below)?
Ah yes -- that's another reason the f90 interface could be disabled:
if configure detects that the f77 and f90 compilers are not link-
> I thought the g95 compiler could
> deal with F77 as well as F95... If so, could I just pass F77='g95'?
That would probably work (F77=g95). I don't know the g95 compiler at
all, so I don't know if it also accepts Fortran-77-style codes. But
if it does, then you're set. Otherwise, specify a different F77
compiler that is link compatible with g95 and you should be good.
>>> I looked in some places in the OpenMPI code, but I couldn't find
>>> "max" being redefined anywhere, but I may be looking in the wrong
>>> places. Anyways, the only way of found of compiling OpenMPI was a
>>> ugly hack: I have to go into those files and remove the "std::"
>>> the "max". With that, it all compiled cleanly.
>> I'm not sure I follow -- I don't see anywhere in OMPI where we use
>> What areas did you find that you needed to change?
> These files are part of the standard C++ headers. In my case, they
> sit in:
Ah, I see.
> In principle, the problems that comes from those files would mean that
> the OpenMPI source has some macro redefining max, but that's what I
> could not find :-(
Gotcha. I don't think we are defining a "max" macro anywhere in the
ompi_info source or related header files. :-(
>> No. We don't really maintain the "make check" stuff too well.
> Oh well... What do you use for testing the implementation?
We have a whole pile of MPI tests in a private SVN repository. The
repository is only private because it contains a lot of other people's
[public] MPI test suites and benchmarks, and we never looked into
redistribution rights for their software. There's nothing really
secret about it -- we just haven't bothered to look into the IP
We use the MPI Testing Tool (MTT) for nightly regression across the
We have weekday and weekend testing schedules. M-Th we do nightly
tests; F-Mon morning, we do a long weekend schedule. This weekend,
for example, we ran about 675k regression tests: