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.
Many of today's compilers for Linux (pgi, intel, etc.) are designed to
be link-compatible with gcc. That must extend to calling conventions
(mangling schemes and argument passing, etc.)
If it's static link-compatible, surely this applies to dynamic (runtime)
Is there stuff going on internal to OMPI that requires tighter
integration between app and library than standard function calls tying
together? How invasive is the memory management stuff?
On Sun, 2008-12-07 at 22:06 -0500, Brock Palen wrote:
> I did something today that I was happy worked, but I want to know if
> anyone has had problem with it.
> At runtime. (not compiling) would a OpenMPI built with pgi work to
> run a code that was compiled with the same version but gcc built
> OpenMPI ? I tested a few apps today after I accidentally did this
> and found it worked. They were all C/C++ apps (namd and gromacs)
> but what about fortran apps? Should we expect problems if someone
> does this?
> I am not going to encourage this, but it is more if needed.
> Brock Palen
> Center for Advanced Computing
> users mailing list