I just bumped the thread on this over on their mailing list. Educating users about LD_LIBRARY_PATH is a losing battle, in my opinion.
The one-sided bugs are more egregious, in my opinion. Refusing to give an error message and instead corrupting program data and seg-faulting is unforgiveable. On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:48 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 10:38 PM, "C. Bergstr?m" <cbergstrom at > pathscale.com>wrote: > >> On 11/ 5/12 10:13 AM, Matthew Knepley wrote: >> >>> I am tired of wasting time on their stupid bugs which we report but are >>> never fixed. Is there a way to retaliate without grenades? >>> >> Switch over to HPX? >> http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu/**tag/hpx/<http://stellar.cct.lsu.edu/tag/hpx/> >> >> I'm not sure it's at a point where it can handle petsc, but keep it in >> mind for 2013. I'm cc'ing one of the devs who is probably not subscribed, >> but can answer questions. (bandwidth permitting and maybe delayed until >> @SC12 or after) >> ----------- >> Option 2 - We (PathScale) have been considering to take on shipping a >> supported version of OpenMPI for some time. If anyone would be interested >> in add-on support or just paying a bounty to fix bugs - We may be able to >> work it out. (Not the perfect open source answer, but maybe it's better >> (cheaper?) than grenades.. >> >> Which bugs are you specifically interested in getting fixed? >> > > When they install to a non-standard location, they do not add RPATH > support for the > library link in their compiler wrappers. > > Matt > > -- > What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their > experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their > experiments lead. > -- Norbert Wiener > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20121104/0ed59883/attachment.html>
