On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> You do not read it correctly. It operates exactly as everything else. You > move make.log to make.log.bkp, which is what we do now, and > write into make.log. It seems to be writing without moving first. > > >> I think it is wrong to reuse the name make.log for both purposes. >> Regardless, the symlinks are not removed, so make.log output overwrites >> $PETSC_ARCH/conf/make.log and (the next time you run it) >> $PETSC_ARCH/conf/make.log.bkp. >> > > In my first message, it says "this is a bug". What is hard about that? > What necessitates 3 replies missing that point? Sounds like your "correct behavior" is exactly what I'm complaining about. Since there is only one level of backup, running twice, as in ./builder2.py buildExample src/... ./builder2.py buildExample src/... destroys all trace of the make.log for the library. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20120726/d17e6d57/attachment.html>
