On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Barry Smith wrote: > > On Apr 5, 2011, at 8:56 AM, Satish Balay wrote: > > > On Tue, 5 Apr 2011, Dmitry Karpeev wrote: > > > >> Okay, but what's going on with petsc-3.1 on that machine? It doesn't fail. > >> Is that because dlsym(0,string) works? > >> Or was dynamic loading disabled in it? > > > > --with-dynamic=0 is usually the default buid. > > > > petsc-3.1 never did dlopen()/dlsym() for this case - but petsc-dev > > does do dlopen()/dlsym() even with --with-dynamic=0 for basic ex2 > > example code - hece it crashes. > > Yes, but the crash is only due to incomplete checking of functionality in > configure before using it, not due to a bad model of how things should be one. >
Whats the difference with dlopen(executable) vs dlopen(libpetsc.so) then? And what is the point of --with-dynamic=1 now? If you really wish to make this the default - remove this ambiguty and go back to a single flag [HAVE_DYNAMIC + USE_DYNAMIC] name it whatver - and then set --with-dynamic=1 as default. And let the user disable it if he wishes. So lisandro should be happy that this is available by default. Satish
