Brad, Thanks for the clarifications.
Note that MPI is unique in that it specifics how main(...) must be written and how to run programs on the command-line. I can't think of any other library that does this (except perhaps other message passing standards). - Ross > -----Original Message----- > From: Brad King [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:22 AM > To: Bartlett, Roscoe A > Cc: [email protected]; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [CMake] History and ideas behind FindMPI.cmake? > > Alin M Elena wrote: > > Do you really need an module for MPI? > > > > All you need is to set the normal shell variables for > compilers to the > > MPI wrappers. > > You need both mpi and non-mpi binaries just use different > build folders. > > Alin is correct. If the project works with an all-MPI build > you can just specify mpicc as the compiler (and similarly for > C++). If anything in CMake prevents this from working we can > address the specific issue. > The FindMPI module is useful for mixed projects that want > some MPI and some non-MPI binaries in the same tree. > > AFAIK the MPI compiler wrappers are provided to help > non-software people (who may not understand ABIs, library > search paths, etc.) use MPI. If every library took this > approach it would be impossible to use more than one library. > Imagine if zlib required one to use zlibcc to link to it. > There is nothing wrong with using MPI libraries directly so > long as the proper compiler flags are found. Teaching > FindMPI how to do this for all MPI distributions may take > some work but is not a wrong approach. > > The current FindMPI module is one of the oldest find-modules in CMake. > It has mostly been updated minimally as necessary for the > needs of folks willing to contribute their changes back to > us. No one has taken the time to contribute a thorough treatment. > > -Brad > > _______________________________________________ CMake mailing list [email protected] http://www.cmake.org/mailman/listinfo/cmake
