I have a problem with hiding the package includes. If I tell PETSc to install ParMetis, I think I should be able to use ParMetis however I want. I do not just want to use it through the PETSc interface. I have done this numerous times. I think most users think this way as well. What is the motivation for hiding the includes?
Thanks, Matt On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > On Wed, 22 Oct 2008, Barry Smith wrote: > >> I wasn't saying we had to solve this problem, but I do think it >> is a problem. A users code could easily pick up the wrong include >> for something since we now have hundreds in our arch/include location. > > I guess part of the problem is namespace issue [This would be the > primary reason for picking up the wrong include]. In that sense > include/packagename/pkginc.h might be a valid thing. But the package > has to support this internally [as in 'make install' provides > include/pkgname/pkginclude'. And the recommended usage from user code > would be: > > #inlcude "package/pkginc.h" > > [this model is not in sync with curent PETSc model of supporing both > install in PETSC_DIR-src and 'make install with prefix']. It might be > better to identify the namespace conflicts and ask the packages to fix > the names.. > > The other kind of conflict is: user installs superlu separately - and > then tries to use PETSc installed with --download-superlu. These 2 > versions of superlu will conflict with each other.. The fix in this > case is to not use the duplicate install of superlu anyway... > > Satish > > -- What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to which their experiments lead. -- Norbert Wiener