Avoid a problem with double-derefence of a variable macro name (i.e.,
a macro with part of its name from an AC_SUBST, such as
```$(foo@BAR@baz)```.
In what might be a bug in Automake 1.14.1, if you do a pattern like
this:
```makefile
lib_LTLIBRARIES = lib@A_PREFIX@a_lib.la
noinst_LTLIBRARIES = lib@A_PREFIX@a_noinst.la
lib@A_PREFIX@a_lib_la_SOURCES = a.c
lib@A_PREFIX@a_noinst_la_SOURCES = $(lib@A_PREFIX@a_lib_la_SOURCES)
```
Then in the resulting Makefile, the value of
```$(lib@A_PREFIX@a_lib_la_OBJECTS)``` will be *blank* (when it really
should be ```a.o```).
To workaround this potential bug, I've simply avoided doing
double-derefences like this, and effectively set the second
```_SOURCES``` line equal to ```a.c``` (just like the first
```_SOURCES``` line).
Fixes#250.
These two macros set the prefix for the OPAL and ORTE libraries,
respectively. Specifically, the OPAL library will be named
libPREFIXopen-pal.la and the ORTE library will be named
libPREFIXopen-rte.la.
These macros must be called, even if the prefix argument is empty.
The intent is that Open MPI will call these macros with an empty
prefix, but other projects (such as ORCM) will call these macros with
a non-empty prefix. For example, ORCM libraries can be named
liborcm-open-pal.la and liborcm-open-rte.la.
This scheme is necessary to allow running Open MPI applications under
systems that use their own versions of ORTE and OPAL. For example,
when running MPI applications under ORTE, if the ORTE and OPAL
libraries between OMPI and ORCM are not identical (which, because they
are released at different times, are likely to be different), we need
to ensure that the OMPI applications link against their ORTE and OPAL
libraries, but the ORCM executables link against their ORTE and OPAL
libraries.
WHAT: Open our low-level communication infrastructure by moving all necessary components (btl/rcache/allocator/mpool) down in OPAL
All the components required for inter-process communications are currently deeply integrated in the OMPI layer. Several groups/institutions have express interest in having a more generic communication infrastructure, without all the OMPI layer dependencies. This communication layer should be made available at a different software level, available to all layers in the Open MPI software stack. As an example, our ORTE layer could replace the current OOB and instead use the BTL directly, gaining access to more reactive network interfaces than TCP. Similarly, external software libraries could take advantage of our highly optimized AM (active message) communication layer for their own purpose. UTK with support from Sandia, developped a version of Open MPI where the entire communication infrastucture has been moved down to OPAL (btl/rcache/allocator/mpool). Most of the moved components have been updated to match the new schema, with few exceptions (mainly BTLs where I have no way of compiling/testing them). Thus, the completion of this RFC is tied to being able to completing this move for all BTLs. For this we need help from the rest of the Open MPI community, especially those supporting some of the BTLs. A non-exhaustive list of BTLs that qualify here is: mx, portals4, scif, udapl, ugni, usnic.
This commit was SVN r32317.
