Matthew Knepley writes: > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:42 AM, Dave Nystrom <Dave.Nystrom at > tachyonlogic.com> wrote: > > > At the end of configure.log, there are two possible ways to build petsc-dev > > that are specified. Which is the recommended way to build - using make or > > using python? I have been using make. > > > > Also, one is labeled as legacy and one is labeled as experimental. That > > gives the impression of having a choice between an old, archaic method or a > > new, experimental approach. Should one just be labeled as production? > > You do not have CMake, and thus did not get the "production" printout.
% which cmake ~/bin/cmake % cmake --version cmake version 2.8.6 I also used the "--download-cmake=yes" for petsc configure and I see that petsc did build cmake. > The make is indeed legacy, but just as fast as CMake (Aron), as I believe > the Python is as well. The Python is experimental, but I have been using > it for a year and it works fine. > > Matt