Greetings! "Eray Ozkural (exa)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Camm Maguire wrote: > > [Jeff]: > > LAM and MPICH evolved completely independantly, and hence have entirely > > different inner workings. Unfortunately, it's not as simple as just > > getting the enumerated constants in our .h files to agree -- there's a lot > > of interworkings below the MPI layer in both LAM and MPICH, none of which > > is common between the two systems. > > > > Sorry. :-( > > LAM and MPICH have completely different architectures so we can't > expect to have binary compatibility. At any rate, the MPI standard does not > specify binary compatibility. > Agreed, we can not expect this. And I didn't know about the standard not specifying binary compatability -- this is good to know, thanks for this! But in the particular cases of lam and mpich, it may be easier than we had thought, and this would probably be a Good Thing, IMHO. Take care, > Regards, > > -- > Eray (exa) Ozkural > Comp. Sci. Dept., Bilkent University, Ankara > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > www: http://www.cs.bilkent.edu.tr/~erayo > > -- Camm Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] ========================================================================== "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens." -- Baha'u'llah
