Ilmar Wilbers wrote:
> Version 1.2.7
> 
> So I suppose we encourage openmpi, then?
>

MPICH 2 should work. PETSc uses MPICH 2 if you ask it to download MPI.

Garth


> ilmar
> 
> Garth N. Wells wrote:
>>
>> Ilmar Wilbers wrote:
>>> When trying to compile dolfin with mpich on 64-bit, I get the 
>>> following error:
>>> cc1plus: warnings being treated as errors
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/pcomm.h:59: warning: 'class 
>>> PMPI::Comm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/pintracomm.h:30: warning: 'class 
>>> PMPI::Intracomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/ptopology.h:31: warning: 'class 
>>> PMPI::Cartcomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/ptopology.h:80: warning: 'class 
>>> PMPI::Graphcomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/pintercomm.h:31: warning: 'class 
>>> PMPI::Intercomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/comm.h:106: warning: 'class 
>>> MPI::Comm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/intracomm.h:30: warning: 'class 
>>> MPI::Intracomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/topology.h:31: warning: 'class 
>>> MPI::Cartcomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/topology.h:112: warning: 'class 
>>> MPI::Graphcomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> /usr/lib/mpich-shmem/include/mpi2c++/intercomm.h:31: warning: 'class 
>>> MPI::Intercomm' has virtual functions but non-virtual destructor
>>> scons: *** [dolfin/main/MPI.os] Error 1
>>>
>>> See http://fenics.org:8010/dolfin/linux_64/builds/22/step-compile_3/0 
>>> for further details.
>>>
>>> Should dolfin support this, or should we stick to openmpi solely?
>>>
>> This is an MPI error so I don't know what we can really do about and I 
>> don't think that we should try to get around it.
>>
>> Are you using MPICH 1 or 2? Last time I tried MPICH 1 it gave loads of 
>> C++ errors.
>>
>> Garth
>>
>>> ilmar
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> DOLFIN-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
>>
> _______________________________________________
> DOLFIN-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev
_______________________________________________
DOLFIN-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/dolfin-dev

Reply via email to