On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Jose E. Roman <jroman at dsic.upv.es> wrote: > > On 26/11/2009, Lisandro Dalcin wrote: > >> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Jose E. Roman <jroman at dsic.upv.es> wrote: >>>> >>> We fixed slepc-dev so that PETSC_ARCH_NAME is not required anymore. >>> >> >> Jose, could you elaborate a bit what would the rules be now for SLEPc? >> Building SLEPc with a prefix build of PETSc will require SLEPc's >> configure to also pass explicitly a--prefix and do "make install" >> after the build? >> >> I still have to figure out how to make both models (I mean, prefix vs. >> multi-arch) builds work in the case of petsc4py/slepc4py and their >> dependencies on themselves and with core PETSc/SLEPc... > > SLEPc can be setup with or without prefix, irrespective of whether PETSc is > prefixed or not. > > Since we need a PETSC_ARCH, one could set an arbitrary value of PETSC_ARCH, > then configure (with or without prefix)+make+(make install). > > If the user does not set PETSC_ARCH, then SLEPc's configure will tell the > user to set PETSC_ARCH=unknown before invoking make. >
OK, now Jose just introduced another standard: an non-prefix SLEPc build with a prefix PETSc build is equivalent to a non-prefix PETSc with PETSC_ARCH=unknown, and... This is a nightmare... I'm a bit lost about what to support and what not in petsc4py/slepc4py... -- Lisandro Dalc?n --------------- Centro Internacional de M?todos Computacionales en Ingenier?a (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnol?gico para la Industria Qu?mica (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Cient?ficas y T?cnicas (CONICET) PTLC - G?emes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594
