On Mon, 12 Mar 2012, Sean Farley wrote: > > > > I agree that petsc/include/petsc is stupid. I see no reason to change the > > perfectly logical include/private just to match what > > some idiot programmers did. > > > > Huh? So, if I install petsc with a --prefix, and (god-forbid!) some other > project also has a 'private' directory, then there's now a conflict. Jed > isn't just pulling this convention out of his ass here.
1. the convention to avoid such conflict is not renaming internal dirs - but using a toplevel namespaced dir. i.e /usr/include/petsc/petsc.h, /usr/include/petsc/private etc.. 2. I think autoconf supports options to choose the include install in either /usr/include or /usr/include/petsc. [is it the includedir option?] Satish
