On Mon, 19 Mar 2012, Matthew Knepley wrote: > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:03 AM, Jed Brown <jedbrown at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > 2012/3/19 Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> > > > >> The other issue here is: multiple library conflict. If there is a user > >> using tetgen directly [and has a separate install of it] - and also > >> uses petsc from the same code , then there could be duplicate symbol > >> issue. [Now the solution is - don't link with a separate tegen - just > >> link with petsc - but thats generally not good.] > >> > > > > Matt has significantly modified tetgen (removing its superfluous use of > > C++) so all these symbols are different. > > > > AND you could have tested your assumption of a problem by trying it with > --download-tetgen, which
>From the emails it wasn't obvious that you are planning on a new name 'ctetgen' - all references were to tetgen. > works because this is how I tested it. The --download-ctetgen option will > work shortly. > > What is this with criticizing what I do before even finding out what I > actually did? sorry - I misunderstood the situation based on this email thread.. The reason I resopinded to the license issue is - we do get emails from folks who are concerend and want clarificaton regarind petsc usage and license. satish