> On Jun 3, 2017, at 5:56 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Satish Balay <[email protected]> writes: > >> On Sat, 3 Jun 2017, Jed Brown wrote: >> >>> We only need one FC now and the preferred executable name is mpifort >>> (other variants like mpif90 are deprecated in both MPICH and Open MPI). >>> I would just add this everywhere we currently have mpif90 but the code >>> is already super convoluted and I'd rather simplify if possible. Does >>> anyone use --with-gnu-compilers versus --with-vendor-compilers? Is it >>> tested anywhere? >> >> Its not tested in the nightlybuilds - but I've seen these options (esp >> with-gnu-compilers) used in configure.log sent by users. >> >> I'm not a fan of this interface - and won't miss it if removed. >> [its a bit ambiguous when one does stuff like: '--with-gnu-compilers=1 >> --with-mpi-dir=.'] >> >> A related issue is - how does one specify compatible compilers [for >> c/c++/fortran] > > --with-mpi-dir or specify each directly CC=cc FC=fort
Yes, but they may pass a FC that is not compatible with the CC. Configure will likely error but it is unlikely it will provide a "very useful error message" about why it failed.
