On Mar 17, 2013, at 5:42 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2013, Barry Smith wrote: > >> >> On Mar 17, 2013, at 5:37 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 17 Mar 2013, Barry Smith wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 17, 2013, at 3:51 PM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sun, 17 Mar 2013, Sonya Blade wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cygwin is required to build PETSc, but not to use it. >>>>>>>> How about the MSys interface, which I've already installed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Not currently, as far as I know. >>>>>> >>>>>>> whats your compiler requirement? And why? >>>>>> I use gfortran which ships with MinGW and with Msys I feel more >>>>>> comfortable. >>>>> >>>>> Are you looking at sequential use of PETSc - or parallel? I see mpich >>>>> doesn't work with msys/mingw. >>>> >>>> And why not. >>> >>> Sorry - forgot to post this link. >>> http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/mpich-discuss/2010-July/007458.html >>> >>>> It is far more natural than cygwin. >>> >>> How so? Even python [which is now considered a universal requirement?] >>> doesn't compile on it. >> >> Why compile python? Windows already has a perfectly good python to use. > > Our build tools don't work with MS paths. Buildsystem does, as does cmake. Which ones don't work? Barry > > Satish > >> >>> >>> Satish >>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> You can try an install of petsc with msys - and see if it works. If not >>>>> send >>>>> us logs at petsc-maint. >>>>> >>>>> [its possible things won't work - and you would have to use >>>>> cygwin/gfortran. Presumably it shouldn't conflict with your msys >>>>> install] >>>>> >>>>> Satish >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
