Hi Dave,
The problem is that with Intel MPI mpif90 and mpicc point to gfortran and
gcc while mpiifort and mpiicc point to ifort and icc. VERY annoying!!! -
But it means relying on mpif90 and mpicc here doesn't work. That's why the
check is in there. I'd have assumed though that Perri would have checked
this on a machine that didn't have the intel MPI but did have the Intel
compilers. Perri can you fix this today please.
All the best
Ross
On 4/1/14, 8:45 AM, "David A Case" <case.biomaps.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>On Tue, Apr 01, 2014, Daniel Roe wrote:
>>
>> This check can be fixed, but the larger issue I think is configure
>> shouldn't assume intel MPI will be used with Intel compilers. Instead, I
>> think this should be a separate flag like '-intelmpi' that users can
>> specify if they want mpiifort etc used instead of mpif90. Thoughts?
>
>For the -mpi flag, we have always said that it is up to the user to
>make sure that the mpicc and mpif90 commands found in the PATH are the
>ones
>they really want. We don't try to distinguish (or care) whethere the
>user is
>using openmpi, or mpich, or mvapich, or some hardware-specific version.
>
>Why should we not do the same for Intel's mpi? That is, it is up to the
>user
>to make mpicc point to mpiicc, and mpif90 to point to mpiifort. We can
>give
>some hand-holding instructions, but it seems like we are going down a
>long,
>long path to try to support every MPI version's command names that might
>come
>up.
>
>This is a pretty tentative recommendation, but it is a simple one!
>
>...dac
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>AMBER-Developers mailing list
>AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
>http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Apr 01 2014 - 09:00:05 PDT
