Re: [OMPI users] Building vs packaging

dani writes: > I don't know about .deb packages, but at least in the rpms there is a > post install scriptlet that re-runs ldconfig to ensure the new libs > are in the ldconfig cache. MPI packages following the Fedora guidelines don't do that (and rpmlint complains bitterly

Re: [OMPI users] Building vs packaging

I don't know about .deb packages, but at least in the rpms there is a post install scriptlet that re-runs ldconfig to ensure the new libs are in the ldconfig cache. On 16/05//2016 18:04, Dave Love wrote: "Rob Malpass" writes: Almost in desperation, I cheated:

Re: [OMPI users] Building vs packaging

"Rob Malpass" writes: > Almost in desperation, I cheated: Why is that cheating? Unless you specifically want a different version, it seems sensible to me, especially as you then have access to packaged versions of at least some MPI programs. Likewise with rpm-based

Re: [OMPI users] Building vs packaging

+1 to everything so far. Also, look in your shell startup files (e.g., $HOME/.bashrc) to see if certain parts of it are not executed for non-interactive logins. A common mistake we see is a shell startup file like this: # ... do setup for all logins ... if (this is a non-interactive

Re: [OMPI users] Building vs packaging

Hey Rob, I don't know if this is what is going on, but in general, when a package is installed via a distro's package management system, it ends up in system locations such as /usr/bin and /usr/lib that are automatically searched when looking for executables and libraries. So, it isn't

[OMPI users] Building vs packaging

Hi all I posted about a fortnight ago to this list as I was having some trouble getting my nodes to be controlled by my master node. Perceived wisdom at the time was to compile with the -enable-orterun-prefix-by-default. For some time I'd been getting cannot open libopen-rte.so.7 which