How to set up Intel Fortran compiler 2017/ Visual Studio 2017 on Windows correctly?

Usage
, ,
1

I am trying to build mumps packages on Windows using Intel Fortran 2017 / Visual Studio 2017, but I can not let cmake to recognize Intel’s ifort and Microsoft’s cl. The cmake version is the latest stable build v3.22.3.

C:\Users\allen\Desktop\mumps-main>cmake . -G “Visual Studio 15 2017 Win64”
– Selecting Windows SDK version 10.0.17134.0 to target Windows 10.0.19043.
– The C compiler identification is MSVC 19.15.26729.0
– The Fortran compiler identification is Intel 17.0.6.20171215
– Detecting C compiler ABI info
– Detecting C compiler ABI info - done
– Check for working C compiler: C:/VS2017/VC/Tools/MSVC/14.15.26726/bin/Hostx86/x64/cl.exe - skipped
– Detecting C compile features
– Detecting C compile features - done
– Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info
– Detecting Fortran compiler ABI info - done
– Determine Intel Fortran Compiler Implicit Link Path
– Determine Intel Fortran Compiler Implicit Link Path - done
– Check for working Fortran compiler: C:/Program Files (x86)/IntelSWTools/compilers_and_libraries_2017.6.270/windows/bin/intel64/ifort.exe - skipped
– checking that C and Fortran compilers can link
– checking that C and Fortran compilers can link - OK
– Populating mumps
– Selecting Windows SDK version 10.0.17134.0 to target Windows 10.0.19043.
– Configuring done
– Generating done
– Build files have been written to: C:/Users/allen/Desktop/mumps-main/_deps/mumps-subbuild
Microsoft (R) Build Engine version 15.8.168+ga8fba1ebd7 for .NET Framework
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

I can see the ifort path(C:/Program Files (x86)/IntelSWTools/compilers_and_libraries_2017.6.270/windows/bin/intel64/ifort.exe) is correct. I can assure that I can build a fortran project on the machine, so there is no issue with licensing. The complain about cl is a surprise! That is part of VS 2017/s VC installation.

What do I miss?

2

Which complaint? Looks normal to me.

3

Are these any concerns? I am expecting ‘working’, insteawd of ‘skipped’.

4

Sure, the wording could be improved. But an error definitely looks different…like aborting the configuration stage with a MUCH longer error message.

5

I believe it does this in the case of the VS generators where CMake extracts the minimum information (version and vendor) but then assumes that the compiler works otherwise within the msbuild environment.

6

The ABI detected worked, so this step could be skipped. This is also printed for Ninja etc.
Please see Brads answer here:

https://gitlab.kitware.com/cmake/cmake/-/merge_requests/4789#note_797935