Plenty of things are desirable, some are even achievable, but even fewer are worth doing.
> On Dec 24, 2014, at 3:48 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: > > Barry Smith <[email protected]> writes: > >>> On Dec 24, 2014, at 12:26 PM, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> In this case, it might be more reliable to compare "cc --version". >> >> Presumably this is trivial with the gnumake stuff? > > It's easy to run it and compare before proceeding with the build. > >> And the mythical petsc-config could do any number of sanity checks each >> time it is run. > > It might be desirable to have a > > petsc-config verify CC=cc CFLAGS='-m32 -mcmodel=large' CXXFLAGS=-std=c++11 > ... > > that would check whether the given compiler configuration is > binary-compatible with the way PETSc was built. It should be reasonably > fast, but could actually run the compiler.
