On Jan 10, 2014, at 1:26 PM, Paul Hargrove <phhargr...@lbl.gov> wrote:
> OMPI's configure says pgi-8.0 and pgi-9.0 are "good". > But pgi-10.0 is rejected without even subjecting it to the tests. > This situation (8.0 and 9.0 "better" than 10.0) sounds fishy to me. That's true. Can you send the output from pgi-10? We don't reject based on compiler name/version -- it should be all behavior-based checks... > You didn't miss anything because I was focused on the idea that mpi_f08 > shouldn't even have been attempted on these compilers. See below for the > pgi-9.0 error messages. 8.0 was similar but output has been lost (scratch > f/s expiry). This was enough for me to figure out what I think the issue is. I was doing one BIND(C) configure test -- it looks like I need to do some additional variations of the BIND(C) test. With these additional tests, I'll bet that we'll rule that we won't build the mpi_f08 module with pgi 8/9. I should have something checked into the trunk soon (for tonight's tarball). Let's see how that does before we bring it over to v1.7 -- we might need to iterate once or twice before getting it right. Thank you! -- Jeff Squyres jsquy...@cisco.com For corporate legal information go to: http://www.cisco.com/web/about/doing_business/legal/cri/
