On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev wrote: > > > > On Jun 10, 2019, at 4:33 PM, Balay, Satish <ba...@mcs.anl.gov> wrote: > > > > now configure needs to know and support full spack build and query all the > > dependency info from spack.. > > We could have some test cases where PETSc is also built by spack, which > presumably works and would also test petsc-spack
this is xsdk test suite.. [right now it just does a build test - but have to add example tests to spack] Satish > > > > > For now - I'll try out a simpler model [i.e manually rebuild as needed] > > Not for long you don't, we have better things to do with your time. > > > > > Satish > > > > On Mon, 10 Jun 2019, Smith, Barry F. via petsc-dev wrote: > > > >> That seems ok. We could also overload --download-mpich=spack for anal > >> people like me :-) > >> > >> Somehow we also need to let configure know where the spack configuration > >> is. > >> > >>> On Jun 10, 2019, at 4:21 PM, Jed Brown <j...@jedbrown.org> wrote: > >>> > >>> "Smith, Barry F." <bsm...@mcs.anl.gov> writes: > >>> > >>>> Yes, spack could be used to do this. I guess essentially Buildsystem > >>>> would issues commands to spack on each "prebuilt" package each time it > >>>> runs in test mode (using the URL in the package file?) and after the > >>>> first time spack would ignore the commands since it already had the > >>>> version ready. I could use this on my machine also. > >>>> > >>>> Barry > >>>> > >>>> --spack-mpich etc ? > >>> > >>> Would --with-mpich=spack be confusing? > >> > > >
