I'll give it a whirl soon. Thanks for working on this! All the changes
sound really positive!
Derek
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:28 PM, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) <
benjamin.kir...@nasa.gov> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:43 PM, "Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311)" <
> benjamin.kir...@nasa.gov> wrote:
>
On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:43 PM, "Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311)"
wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:33 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
>> f the hassle of multiple targets is just too annoying, maybe direct
>> support in configure isn't the way to go?
>
> I'll see what the general consensus is - it really isn'
On Nov 26, 2012, at 4:33 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
> f the hassle of multiple targets is just too annoying, maybe direct
> support in configure isn't the way to go?
I'll see what the general consensus is - it really isn't too bad, all of the
contrib/*/Makefile.am's are pretty boilerplate, save fo
On Mon, 26 Nov 2012, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote:
> One thing I'm waffling on is adding a -opt suffix to the
> executables. I think I might, and then symlink e.g.
>
> meshtool -> meshtool-opt
>
> upon installation.
I like this idea.
> Also, potentially the most controversial issue is the
On Nov 24, 2012, at 2:00 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
>
> On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote:
>
>> $ ./configure METHODS="opt dbg devel"
>>
>> and have it create a subdirectory for each, the only catch then is a
>>
>> $ make
>>
>> will *always* recurse into each. In fact, I can
Sent from my iPhone
On Nov 24, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Roy Stogner wrote:
> For comparison's sake, "what we had previously" was a state in which
> every few months I'd have to manually wipe and rebuild contrib/
> because our Makefiles got confused by a compiler change, and every
> few years I'd have t
On Sat, 24 Nov 2012, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311) wrote:
$ ./configure METHODS="opt dbg devel"
and have it create a subdirectory for each, the only catch then is a
$ make
will *always* recurse into each. In fact, I can add that alongside
what is already there - but letting METHODS trump METHO
On Nov 24, 2012, at 9:49 AM, Vikram Garg wrote:
> Just think a separate document might make things clearer for users. Once they
> get comfortable with libMesh up and running, they can start exploring the new
> options.
Fully agree. I just want to get some group consensus on how we think our
Might be good if we have one page document with the release notes on the
new build system ? It can include the simplest, most straightforward way of
getting libMesh up and running as before. And then it can also include the
newer features of the system and how they can be useful.
Just think a sepa
