It is not worthy any additional logic in the already messing configure process to save a few downloads.
Barry On Oct 29, 2013, at 1:59 PM, Satish Balay <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 29 Oct 2013, Jed Brown wrote: > >> Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: >>> Or simpler just have the —with-clean nuke external packages; makes >>> life easy. By "store the tarballs in a common place” and SHA1 crap >>> you are making the system more complicated to understand and >>> maintain. >> >> People will complain when they have to download the same tarball many >> times. But I don't especially care as long as the builds are done >> inside $PETSC_ARCH instead of in a common place. (This is also useful >> when building multiple configurations of PETSc in parallel.) > > There is also the issue with git repos to deal with. [presumably the > above logic would be slightly different than the tarballs] > > We [Jed and I ] also discussed having git repos and corresponding > tarballs match - and caching tarballs locally for unreliable external > sites. And then using SHA as a way of versioning to eliminate most > cases where with-clean would be needed. > > Just a note: all these issues are primarily with git users - not > petsc-release/tarball users. > > Satish
