On Tue, 28 Jan 2014, Barry Smith wrote: > > > > Satish is probably right here about the build location. It's been three or > > four years since I've installed it this way. I stand by that it's still > > difficult to revert. I actually tried this method because of PETSc and > > regretted it because the experience was terrible. Using a package manager > > is more maintainable, and I think PETSc's recommendation of the > > hpc.sourceforge build is a disservice to both users and to PETSc's > > excellent reputation. > > I think package managers for Mac OS are a disservice to the community and > recommend not using them. (See all the discussions in these emails about how > they fuck up). >
My view is: anyone using OSX has bought into the idea of not having a proper package management system. [yeah you get easy-install packages - but most of them don't have an proper way to uninstall - unless its an "osx-app" which you can drag/drop into trash] gfortran from hpc.sourceforge does things "no worse" than most packages that are available for OSX. Its not obvious - but one can use the file listing from the tarball [as mentioned in my previous e-mail to uninstall]. And is tucked away in /usr/local - so it doesn't do any damage like other packages. [for eg: install mercurial for OSX - and see if you can uninstall it] I agree a better package management system [aka macports/homebrew] should be preferable. But with all the wierd issues that keep comping up with users using macports on petsc lists - I can't convince myself that it is a better recommendation. perhaps homebrew is better - I don't know. I would aswell recommend virtualbox with linux as a superior choice. Satish
