On Fri, Jan 18, 2013, Josh Berryman wrote:
> Yes. It seems like there are two separate use-cases, which is leading
> configure to have a bit of an inconsistent approach
>
>
> 1) ./configure -mpi intel:
> Require that all the paths are set up: mpicc points to mpiicc, with all the
> libs and paths set up correctly, and mpiicc pointing to icc. This is
I don't think this is correct. I don't see any references to mpiicc (never
knew that existed.) I think it is better to say that this option assumes
that mpicc and mpif90 are correctly installed, and know how to find the proper
libraries. For me, mpicc/mpif90 are always in $AMBERHOME/bin, but I've not
been able to ever convince anyone else that this is a desirable option.
>
> Despite requiring all this prior setup, it still (currently, pulled from
> dev tree about a week ago) has a kludgey look around for the intel library
> path, sometimes breaking if it turns out that the path is not what was
> expected.
It's true that configure2 tests the (serial) intel compiler even when -mpi
is set, which is probably not what it should be doing.
>
> 2) ./configure intel:
> Doesn't require scripts to be sourced, sets fc=ifort, etc, itself, and also
> has a kludgey look around for the intel library path.
Well, ifort still has to be in the users' PATH; I suppose we could also assume
that the user's LD_LIBRARY_PATH is also correct.(?)
...still thinking...dac
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Fri Jan 18 2013 - 08:00:02 PST
