> On Apr 21, 2018, at 6:38 PM, Balay, Satish <ba...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Apr 2018, Václav Hapla wrote: > >> Sorry Barry, that's my fault. >> >> Thanks a lot Satish for the quick fix with !trilinos. Hope it works now. >> >> I think the chaco partitioner should be definitely replaced by simple it >> these tests as Matt suggested. But I will rather push it within a separate >> PR since it extends the tested archs (by removing chaco and !trilinos >> requirements) so some previously unseen issues might appear theoretically. > > Yes - any changes should be a new PR. > > It would be good to figure out exactly where the difference comes form > [wrt chaco from trilinos vs separate install of chaco - or some other > interaction from trilinos]
Different random numbers being generated? > > and we could keep chaco tests - and tailor them appropriately with > '!trilinos' or have multipe outout file [i.e _alt.out format] for > chaco tests - if thats appropriate. If both sets are correct than an _alt file is better than !trilinos in the long run. Barry > > Satish