[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: netCDF on CRAYs

This archive contains answers to questions sent to Unidata support through mid-2025. Note that the archive is no longer being updated. We provide the archive for reference; many of the answers presented here remain technically correct, even if somewhat outdated. For the most up-to-date information on the use of NSF Unidata software and data services, please consult the Software Documentation first.

  • Subject: Re: netCDF on CRAYs
  • Date: Tue, 01 Feb 1994 22:08:50 -0700
> Organization: NCAR/SCD
> Keywords: 199402020104.AA26313

Dick,

> Cray Research recommends 'bld' over 'ar'.  Has UNIDATA considered
> using bld instead of ar in the makefile for libnetcdf.a?   It seems
> that this should be easy for users to do themselves, say in the 
> CUSTOMIZE file or by using setenv (as explained in the INSTALL file).

I didn't know about "bld", but it's an acceptable substitute for "ar" if the
tests still pass OK when linked with the bld library.  We can change the
configure script to use bld instead of ar when generating the Makefiles for
the next release, if that's preferred.

> Would UNIDATA have any concern if I released the Cray binary as a bld 
> product rather than an ar archive?  We would prefer to use bld rather 
> than ar here, unless there's good reason not to do so.

That sounds fine, since the SEGLDR(1) documentation recommends bld.

--Russ