[Matthew Knepley]

On 3/26/07, SLIM H.A. <h.a.slim at durham.ac.uk> wrote:
> That's what I thought, but as you can see from the make log, compilation
> is done with -fPIC:

Yes, but some libraries which PETSc does not build (in this case MKL) were not
compiled with -fPIC. Satish's fix should work.

  Matt

> mpif90 -c  -I. -fPIC -g
> -I/data/hamilton/drk1has/_libs/petsc/petsc-2.3.2-p9
> -I/data/hamilton/drk1has/_libs/petsc/petsc-2.3.2-p9/
> bmake/linux-gnu-intel
> -I/data/hamilton/drk1has/_libs/petsc/petsc-2.3.2-p9/include         -o
> somefort.o somefort.F
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov
> > [mailto:owner-petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov] On Behalf Of Thomas Geenen
> > Sent: 26 March 2007 16:02
> > To: petsc-users at mcs.anl.gov
> > Subject: Re:
> >
> > i think you should.
> >
> >
> > On Monday 26 March 2007 16:57, SLIM H.A. wrote:
> > > recompile with -fPIC
> >
> > cheers
> > Thomas
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
One trouble is that despite this system, anyone who reads journals widely
and critically is forced to realize that there are scarcely any bars to eventual
publication. There seems to be no study too fragmented, no hypothesis too
trivial, no literature citation too biased or too egotistical, no design too
warped, no methodology too bungled, no presentation of results too
inaccurate, too obscure, and too contradictory, no analysis too self-serving,
no argument too circular, no conclusions too trifling or too unjustified, and
no grammar and syntax too offensive for a paper to end up in print. --
Drummond Rennie