I'm trying to get some legacy fortran code compiled on an SGI workstation.
In the Makefile, the lines
.f:
co $#
do appear. Make exits with the error
sh: co: not found
I tried googling for that program, but to no avail. Does anyone know what this could be, and where to obtain it - given the short name, I hope that it is some kind of standard tool, rather than something specific to this very Makefile.
co is part of the RCS version control suite. It "checks out" the version of the file in question from it's "repository" (which is usually same file name with a ,v suffix sometimes stored in an RCS/ subdirectory).
Related
I tried to use a make file in code::blocks but I am doing it wrong. I have the version installed with the compilers included. http://sourceforge.net/projects/codeblocks/files/Binaries/10.05/Windows/codeblocks-10.05mingw-setup.exe/download. What do I do with the make file? It starts with:
CC=gcc
best, US
You don't tend to execute the make file itself, rather you execute make, giving it the make file as an argument:
make -f pax.mk
If your make file is actually one of the standard names (like makefile or Makefile), you don't even need to specify it. It'll be picked up by default (if you have more than one of these standard names in your build directory, you better look up the make man page to see which takes precedence).
As paxdiablo said make -f pax.mk would execute the pax.mk makefile, if you directly execute it by typing ./pax.mk, then you would get syntax error.
Also you can just type make if your file name is makefile/Makefile.
Suppose you have two files named makefile and Makefile in the same directory then makefile is executed if make alone is given. You can even pass arguments to makefile.
Check out more about makefile at this Tutorial : Basic understanding of Makefile
What I want to achieve
I try to set up a toolchain to compile OpenCL applications for Intel FPGAs. Therefore beneath building the C++ based host application I need to invoke the Intel OpenCL offline compiler for OpenCL kernels.
This step should only take place if the cl source file was edited or the resulting binaries are missing. My approach is to add a custom command to invoke the CL compiler and create a custom target that depends on the output generated by this command. The offline Open CL compiler is called aoc and due to the possibility of multiple SDK-Versions present on the system I invoke it with an absolute path that is stored in aocExecutable. This is the relevant part of my CMakeLists.txt
set (CLKernelName "vector_add")
set (CLKernelSourceFile "${PROJECT_SOURCE_DIR}/${CLKernelName}.cl")
set (CLKernelBinary "${PROJECT_BINARY_DIR}/${CLKernelName}.aocx")
add_executable (HostApplication main.cpp)
# ------ a lot of unneccessary details here ------
add_custom_command (OUTPUT "${CLKernelBinary}"
COMMAND "${aocExecutable} -march=emulator ${CLKernelSourceFile} -o ${CLKernelBinary}"
DEPENDS "${CLKernelSourceFile}"
)
add_custom_target (CompileCLSources DEPENDS "${CLKernelBinary}")
add_dependencies (HostApplication CompileCLSources)
What doesn't work
Running this in the CLion IDE under Linux leads to this error:
/bin/sh: 1: /home/me/SDKsAndFrameworks/intelFPGA/18.1/hld/bin/aoc -march=emulator /home/me/CLionProjects/cltest/vector_add.cl -o /home/me/CLionProjects/cltest/cmake-build-debug-openclintelfpgasimulation/vector_add.aocx: not found
The whole command expands correctly, copying it and pasting it into a terminal works without problems, so I'm not sure what the not found error means.
Further Question
Assumed the above problem will be solved, how can I achieve that the custom command is not only invoked if the output file is not present in the build directory but also if the CL source file was edited?
As you can see in the error message, the bash interprets the whole command line
/home/me/SDKsAndFrameworks/intelFPGA/18.1/hld/bin/aoc -march=emulator /home/me/CLionProjects/cltest/vector_add.cl -o /home/me/CLionProjects/cltest/cmake-build-debug-openclintelfpgasimulation/vector_add.aocx
as a single executable.
This is because you wrap COMMAND in your script with double quotes.
Remove these double quotes, so everything will work.
As in many other scripting languages, in CMake double quotes makes the quoted string to be interpreted as a single argument for a function or for a macro.
But in add_custom_command/add_custom_target functions a keyword COMMAND starts a list of arguments, first of which denotes an executable and others - separated parameters for that executable.
I'm using PVS-Studio in docker image based on ubuntu:18.04 for cross-compiling a couple of files with arm-none-eabi-gcc. After doing pvs-studio-analyzer trace -- .test/compile_with_gcc.sh strace_out file is successfully created, it's not empty and contains calls to arm-none-eabi-gcc.
However pvs-studio-analyzer analyze complains that "No compilation units were found". I tried using --compiler arm-none-eabi-gcc key with no success.
Any ideas?
The problem was in my approach to compilation. Instead of using a proper build system, I used a wacky shell script (surely, I thought, using a build system for 3 files is an overkill, shell script won't hurt anybody). And in that script I used grep to redefine one constant in the source - kinda like that: grep -v -i "#define[[:blank:]]\+${define_name}[[:blank:]]" ${project}/src/main/main.c | ~/opt/gcc-arm-none-eabi-8-2018-q4-major/bin/arm-none-eabi-gcc -o main.o -xc
So compiler didn't actually compiled a proper file, it compiled output of grep. So naturally, PVS-Studio wasn't able to analyze it.
TL;DR: Don't use shell scripts as build system.
We have reviewed the stace_out file. It can be handled correctly by the analyzer, if the source files and compilers are located by the absolute path in the stace_out file. We have a suggestion what might help you. You can "wrap" the build command in a call to pvs-studio-analyzer -- trace and pvs-studio-analyzer analyze and place them inside your script (compile_with_gcc.sh). Thus, the script should start with the command:
pvs-studio-analyzer trace --
and end with the command:
pvs-studio-analyzer analyze
This way we will make sure that the build and analysis were started at the same container run. If the proposed method does not help, please describe in more detail, by commands, the process of building the project and running the analyzer. Also tell us whether the container reruns between the build and the formation of strace_out, and the analysis itself.
It would also help us a lot if you ran the pvs-studio-analyzer command with the optional --dump-log flag and provided it to us. An example of a command that can be used to do this:
pvs-studio-analyzer analyze --dump-log ex.log
Also, it seems that it is not possible to quickly solve the problem and it is probably more convenient to continue the conversation via the feedback form on the product website.
I am trying to execute a binary file on a xeon phi coprocessor, and it is coming back with "bash: cannot execute binary file". So I am trying to find how to either view an error log or have it display what's happening when I tell it to execute that is causing it not work. I have already tried bash --verbose but it didn't display any additional information. Any ideas?
You don't specify where you compiled your executable nor where you tried to execute from.
To compile a program on the host system to be executed directly on the coprocessor, you must either:
if using one of the Intel compilers, add -mmic to the compiler
command line
if using gcc, use the cross-compilers provided with the MPSS
(/usr/linux-k1om-4.7) - note, however, that the gcc compiler does not
take advantage of vectorization on the coprocessor
If you want to compile directly on the coprocessor, you can install the necessary files from the additional rpm files provided for the coprocessor (found in mpss-/k1om) using the directions from the MPSS user's guide for installing additional rpm files.
To run a program on the coprocessor, if you have compiled it on the host, you must either:
copy your executable file and required libraries to the coprocessor
using scp before you ssh to the coprocessor yourself to execute the
code.
use the micnativeloadex command on the host - you can find a man page
for that on the host.
If you are writing a program using the offload model (part of the work is done using the host then some of the work is passed off to the coprocessor), you can compile on the host using the Intel compilers with no special options.
Note, however, that, regardless of what method you use, any libraries to be used with an executable for the coprocessor will need themselves to be built for the coprocessor. The default libraries exist but any libraries you add, you need to build a version for the coprocessor in addition to any version you make for the host system.
I highly recommend the articles you will find under https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/programming-and-compiling-for-intel-many-integrated-core-architecture. These articles are written by people who develop and/or support the various programming tools for the coprocessor and should answer most of your questions.
Update: What's below does NOT answer the OP's question - it is one possible explanation for the cannot execute binary file error, but the fact that the error message is prefixed with bash: indicates that the binary is being invoked correctly (by bash), but is not compatible with the executing platform (compiled for a different architecture) - as #Barmar has already stated in a comment.
Thus, while the following contains some (hopefully still somewhat useful) general information, it does not address the OP's problem.
One possible reason for cannot execute binary file is to mistakenly pass a binary (executable) file -- rather than a shell script (text file containing shell code) -- as an operand (filename argument) to bash.
The following demonstrates the problem:
bash printf # fails with '/usr/bin/printf: /usr/bin/printf: cannot execute binary file'
Note how the mistakenly passed binary's path prefixes the error message twice; If the first prefix says bash: instead, the cause is most likely not a problem of incorrect invocation, but one of trying to a invoke an incompatible binary (compiled for a different architecture).
If you want bash to invoke a binary, you must use the -c option to pass it, which allows you to specify an entire command line; i.e., the binary plus arguments; e.g.:
bash -c '/usr/bin/printf "%s\n" "hello"' # -> 'hello'
If you pass a mere binary filename instead of a full path - e.g., -c 'program ...' - then a binary by that name must exist in one of the directories listed in the $PATH variable that bash sees, otherwise you'll get a command not found error.
If, by contrast, the binary is located in the current directory, you must prefix the filename with ./ for bash to find it; e.g. -c './program ...'
When I'm compiling something, it gives errors like this:
$ make
CC test/hello.o
test/hello.c:37:29: fatal error: this/is/hard/to/find.h: No such file or directory
Then, is it possible to see the full command of CC (with all the options) by just giving an proper option to make without modifying Makefile?
Usually when a Makefile is set up to print summary lines like this instead of the full command, they also define a VERBOSE or QUIET variable to control that behavior. You might try just running make as make VERBOSE=1, but if that doesn't work you'll have to check the Makefile to see if it supports verbose output through some other mechanism, or post some of your Makefile for us to see.
Alternatively, you could use something like ElectricAccelerator, a high-performance replacement for GNU make that, among other features, can produce an XML-marked-up version of your build log, including all the command-lines for every command invoked, even if the Makefile normally only prints summaries like you've shown.
(Disclaimer: I'm the architect and lead developer of ElectricAccelerator)