Description
Per the discussion on #4413, I wonder if OPAL_CHECK_PACKAGE should be improved.
We talked about the difficulty of adding a directory via -L but not necessarily being able to guarantee that a library in that directory would be used.
#4413 (comment) and #4413 (comment) mention some ideas for improvement.
We might also want to test for the presence of the function in a library (and/or the viability of the overall library) by explicitly adding the absolute filename of the library into the command line. I.e., add /blah/blah/blah/libFOO.whatever to the link command line rather than -L/blah/blah/blah -lFOO (because the latter actually has some ambiguity).
That might be a bit weird, though, because then we might have to list the same /blah/blah/blah/libFOO.whatever in LIBS (rather than adding -L/blah/blah/blah to LDFLAGS and -lFOO to LIBS) because that would be the only way to *guarantee* the same result during the build as we got during configure`. Not sure how I feel about that, offhand.
Just some thoughts.
FYI @rhc54 @ggouaillardet