I vote we don't worry about this for 1.0.x. Does anyone care about PGI 5.2 in 1.0.x? If so, is it a quick/easy fix to the Makefile.am to do what Ralf proposes (and we apparently already do something similar on the trunk)?
> -----Original Message----- > From: devel-boun...@open-mpi.org > [mailto:devel-boun...@open-mpi.org] On Behalf Of Ralf Wildenhues > Sent: Tuesday, March 21, 2006 5:35 AM > To: de...@open-mpi.org > Subject: Re: [OMPI devel] PG 5.2 build problem with v1.0.2a10 > > * Josh Hursey wrote on Tue, Mar 21, 2006 at 02:20:54PM CET: > > >>On Mar 20, 2006, at 12:13 PM, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > > >>> > > >>>Do you still have the complete build log? The place where > > >>>libopal is > > >>>created is interesting, as well as './libtool --config'. > > > The files should be attached. > > Ahh. That explains it: > > | /bin/sh ../libtool --tag=CC --mode=link pgcc -O -DNDEBUG > -export-dynamic -o libopal.la -rpath > /san/homedirs/jjhursey/local/odin//ompi/release/lib > libltdl/libltdlc.la asm/libasm.la class/libclass.la > event/libevent.la mca/base/libmca_base.la > memoryhooks/libopalmemory.la runtime/libruntime.la > threads/libthreads.la util/libopalutil.la > mca/maffinity/base/libmca_maffinity_base.la > mca/memory/base/libmca_memory_base.la > mca/memory/malloc_hooks/libmca_memory_malloc_hooks.la > mca/paffinity/base/libmca_paffinity_base.la > mca/timer/base/libmca_timer_base.la > mca/timer/linux/libmca_timer_linux.la -lm -lutil -lnsl -lpthread > | mkdir .libs > | pgcc -shared -fpic -DPIC > -Wl,--whole-archive,libltdl/.libs/libltdlc.a,asm/.libs/libasm. a,class/.libs/libclass.a,event/.libs/libevent.a,mca/base/.libs/libmca_ba se.a,memoryhooks/.libs/libopalmemory.a,ru> ntime/.libs/libruntime.a,threads/.libs/libthreads.a,util/.libs > /libopalutil.a,mca/maffinity/base/.libs/libmca_maffinity_base. > a,mca/memory/base/.libs/libmca_memory_base.a,mca/memory/malloc > _hooks/.libs/libmca_memory_malloc_hooks.a,mca/paffinity/base/. > libs/libmca_paffinity_base.a,mca/timer/base/.libs/libmca_timer > _base.a,mca/timer/linux/.libs/libmca_timer_linux.a > -Wl,--no-whole-archive -ldl -lm -lutil -lnsl -lpthread -lc > -Wl,-soname -Wl,libopal.so.0 -o .libs/libopal.so.0.0.0 > | pgcc-Warning-No files to process > > PGI/5.2 does not like it when it's not given any object file, and it's > supposed to invoke the linker. It does not see the libraries, as they > are all hidden as arguments to be passed to the linker. This has been > fixed since in PGI/6.0 and 6.1. > > Nevertheless, there are probably more compilers which can fail in this > way. I added a test to this extent to the CVS version of Libtool a > while ago, in order to gain more knowledge about this. > > The gist is: this could *probably* be worked around inside libtool. > But it would not solve all issues, when looking at the bigger picture > of Libtool+Automake interaction. > > Why is that? Well, you write > libfoo_la_SOURCES = > libfoo_la_LIBADD = libbar1.la libbar2.la ... > > but then Automake does not really know which language > (compiler) to use > for linking libfoo. And this second issue is not so trivial to solve > inside the autotools. > > But an easy workaround for the moment is to either add a dummy source > file to libfoo_la_SOURCES, or change one of the convenience archives > libbar* added into just the objects being added. > > I did not notice this issue here, because the OpenMPI trunk > does exactly > the latter (for example through opal/class/Makefile.am, which is > included in opal/Makefile.am), and I do not follow branches much. > > Does that help? > > Cheers, > Ralf > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list > de...@open-mpi.org > http://www.open-mpi.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/devel >
