Mark,
You have not addressed the issue of people have a stale PETSC_OPTIONS. Why
is that any less likely then a stale .petscrc?
Barry
Note that based on our experiences with ./configure people generally have
lots and lots of stale environmental variables set in their .bashrc that they
don't know about. Hence we turn them all off before starting ./configure
> On Apr 14, 2015, at 6:52 PM, Mark Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Barry Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Apr 14, 2015, at 4:45 PM, Mark Adams <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > This has never been a problem.
> >
> > I suspect this is because almost no one knows about PETSC_OPTIONS and
> > uses it.
> >
> >
> > This could be a migration path for people using ~/.petscrc ...
>
> So people start using PETSC_OPTIONS. They do the same stupid thing of
> setting something and forget about a year later and then we have to remove
> PETSC_OPTIONS. Why do we want to migrate them to something just as dangerous?
>
>
> Do we have any idea of the number of users that use ~/.petscrc ?
>
> If no one is using it other than us then we switch and there is no problem.
> I have never thought of using it. I never have global options that I always
> want to use like this. Does anyone other than us for regression tests?
>
> The problem we have seen is someone has some temporary junk in their home
> directory and it gets picked up. No one uses .bashrc as a scratch pad but
> people do use their home directory this way.
>
