Hey,
at a rough read i think i had the same sort of issue.
For us, the FindMPI detected "MPI_Fortran_INCLUDE_PATH" correctly -
however, what did matter in our case
was the order those paths have been used in CMake.
as example:
target_include_directories(yourtarget ${MPI_C_INCLUDE_PATH}
${MPI_
I am proud to announce the second CMake 3.5 release candidate.
Sources and binaries are available at:
https://cmake.org/download/
Documentation is available at:
https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.5
Release notes appear below and are also published at
https://cmake.org/cmake/help/v3.5/release/
This seems to be the same issue discussed here:
https://cmake.org/pipermail/cmake-developers/2014-December/023831.html
which refers to a bug marked fixed here:
http://www.cmake.org/Bug/view.php?id=15182
However, I'm still getting the issue in 3.5.0-rc1
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:24 PM, Jack
Hi,
If I call FindMPI, it successfully finds Intel MPI, including all the
proper include paths etc. However, when I compile MPI code, I get an error
message saying that the mod file (called by "use mpi" in the code) was not
compiled by this compiler. The problem appears to be that the Intel
compil
On 02/10/2016 09:30 AM, Thibault Genessay wrote:
>> While CMakeForceCompiler is deprecated we think it should still work
>> in most cases where it worked before, just with a warning. What
>> actually breaks?
>
> I downloaded 3.5 this morning and tried again. I get all the warnings,
> but the buil
[Note: this was erroneously sent off-list to Brad only, sorry for the noise]
Hi Brad,
On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Brad King wrote:
> Thanks for trying the release candidate!
>
Well, the download page is a bit nasty as when you click "download the
latest release 3.4.1" you are shown the ge
[Note: this was erroneously sent off-list to Chuck only, sorry for the
noise]
Hi Chuck,
I can't really post my toolchain file for two reasons: 1) it contains
proprietary stuff and 2) I am ashamed of it.
OK, here you go. I just renamed whatever was proprietary. Please don't
shoot me, I promise my
On 02/10/2016 03:49 AM, Vania Joloboff wrote:
> We have not yet moved to 3.5 but seeing this discussion, I am wondering
> what we will have to do. In our project, we have several C and C++ cross
> compilers and we want to compare them on selected benchmarks. We also
> want to compare different co
Hi
We have not yet moved to 3.5 but seeing this discussion, I am wondering
what we will have to do. In our project, we have several C and C++ cross
compilers and we want to compare them on selected benchmarks. We also
want to compare different compile options and different linking options.
We