Ah -- you did not previously indicate that LAM itself failed to compile
(this is why it did not install -- because it didn't even compile
properly).
This looks like a bug in LAM 6.5.6 that was fixed in a later version,
and yes, this is directly related to using a later version of Linux.
The problem is how the global "errno" is treated in modern systems. It
used to be a single integer. But once threads were introduced, it was
no longer sufficient for it to be a global value (because each thread
might need a different errno value) -- errno became a function (behind
the scenes, due to some trickery with #define's).
Apparently, in 6.5.6, we didn't #include the right files in all the
right places to get the prototype for errno correct.
I believe that you said that you are using some software that requires
the use of LAM 6.5.6. What software is this? Can your vendor upgrade?
6.5.6 is very, very old -- we officially don't support the 6.5 series
(and haven't for quite a while).
At the least, can you upgrade to 6.5.9? It should be roughly the same
as what you have for 6.5.6, but with a few bugs fixed.
On Jan 19, 2005, at 11:15 AM, Andrew.Bridgeman_at_[hidden] wrote:
>
> In answer to your suggestions:
>
> 1). I have sent the make log and configure log on a previous mail (
> waiting on replies).
> 2). I have tried using the prefix like suggested but i got exactly the
> same result.
> 3). There are no other versions of lam on the machine, i tried a
> find/which and rpm search.
>
> The main problem at the moment is that it does not put the install
> anywhere on my system after running make or make install. Any idea
> please let me know.
--
{+} Jeff Squyres
{+} jsquyres_at_[hidden]
{+} http://www.lam-mpi.org/
|
