On Fri, 20 Dec 2013, Jed Brown wrote: > Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: > > > On Dec 20, 2013, at 1:45 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: > >> > >>> Since Jack has fixed these issues why is this still broken in > >>> nightly tests of next? > >> > >> He fixed the issues in his repository, but we never told PETSc to use > >> his new version. > > > > Should we be using his repository? Should we be figuring out better > > ways of handling updates to other software from our stuff? It is > > not productive to have this kind of stuff happen, how can we > > prevent it in the future? > > When he updates, we should be making a one-line commit in > config/PETSc/packages/elemental.py to use his new version. It's not > hard, but someone has to do it. I'm about to step onto a plane, but I > can do it when I land.
Sorry didn't update this before. Will test and commit the fix. BTW: this is in jed/elemental-int64 branch [which hasn't been merged to master yet] And I'll also remove all self.download usage when self.gitcommit [as this is inconsistant code] [And I need to complete balay/giturl-fixes so that tarball urls are automatically constructed from giturls - for usage without git] Satish > > I don't want to "automatically" use the most recent version because then > PETSc builds will break when he uses a new language feature or changes > an interface, and we won't be able to reliably rewind to an old state. >
