[Pkg-openmpi-maintainers] Question regarding apparent dependency on libibverbs

[Manuel Prinz]

Am Dienstag, den 31.03.2009, 19:28 +0200 schrieb Mikael Djurfeldt:
> Well, I'm not quite sure what you refer to with "build-dependency".
> The music package has a build-dependency on libopenmpi-dev.  In my
> opinion, libopenmpi-dev should have a "dependency" (i.e. not
> build-dependency) on libibverbs-dev.  If you would add such a
> dependency, then installing libopenmpi-dev would automatically drag
> libibverbs-dev with it and the missing libibverbs.la file would be
> installed.

Oops, I meant to write "dependancy". Sorry for the confusion! I should
not write mails in a hurry. :/

> Regarding static and shared libraries, I don't think it matters much
> to music which I use.  I certainly *can* use shared libraries.  But
> note that music doesn't refer to libibverbs at all.  It is because
> music uses libtool that libibverbs.la gets referred to.  I can't do
> much about that by changes to music.

If you link against the shared libraries, the problem vanishes.
libopenmpi1 depends on libibverbs. The build problem with music results
from a missing static library not being available due to a missing
dependency. What I tried to say is that although I'm going to fix the
dependency issue with libopenmpi-dev you should consider using linking
against the shared libraries. Linking against the static libraries
should be a "last resort" solution, if you can't build music using
shared libraries for whatever reason.

> Is it OK for you to add an ordinary dependency on libibverbs-dev?

Yes, I will of course do that. Nevertheless, you should consider using
the shared libraries.

Best regards
Manuel
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Url : http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-openmpi-maintainers/attachments/20090331/f9fb34c0/attachment.pgp