Dear Anton, On 9/21/2017 4:51 PM, Anton Shterenlikht wrote:
At present I have a collection of Makefiles, one for each platform (HPC system, compiler, libraries, etc.). This works ok, but sometimes the users are not sure which libraries are available or which they should use, i.e. they are not sure which Makefile to use.
It's very typical cases that people try autoconf :-)
I was wondering if I can automate this choice with autotools.
Good! To check the availabilities of the libraries, autoconf is still useful. As far as the compiler use standard syntax (like -I, -L) to specify the directories for header & libraries, configure script does not need the execution of the compiled binary. It would be possible for configure script to check the availabilities of the libraries, and override sometimes (e.g. ignore the libraries even if it was found).
You mention cross-compiling. However, my examples with mpif90 and mpirun, or caf and cafrun, are native, not cross-compiling. The executables are run on the same platform, it's just the invocation of the executable is not simply ./a.out, but "mpirun -np <numproc> ./a.out", or "cafrun -np <numproc> ./a.out".
Ahh... sorry for my overlooking on the errors you pasted in your first post. I can see that the program starts but aborts immediately. Maybe "cafrun" prepares the appropriate environment and commandline options, even if the original source is very small bit like "hello world", they are needed. I think, Christian's idea to insert "cross_compiling=yes" to your skeleton could make the first issue passed.
Anyway, it sounds that autotools will give me more headache than help.
Maybe I made you misunderstood, I'm quite sorry. Regards, mpsuzuki _______________________________________________ Autoconf mailing list Autoconf@xxxxxxx https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/autoconf
