On Mon, 21 Aug 2023, meator wrote: > Hi. I'm trying to package PETSc using the tarball with documentation > (https://ftp.mcs.anl.gov/pub/petsc/release-snapshots/petsc-with-docs-3.19.4.tar.gz) > and I've got some questions about the structure of PETSc. > > What are the contents of the /usr/lib/petsc directory in destdir for? This > directory has two subrirectories: bin and conf. Why is the bin/ directory in > lib/? lib/ should be for libraries.
balay@p1 /home/balay $ find /usr/lib -name bin /usr/lib/debug/bin /usr/lib/debug/usr/bin /usr/lib/jvm/java-1.8.0-openjdk-1.8.0.372.b07-6.fc38.x86_64/jre/bin /usr/lib/jvm/java-17-openjdk-17.0.8.0.7-1.fc38.x86_64/bin /usr/lib/jvm/java-11-openjdk-11.0.20.0.8-1.fc38.x86_64/bin balay@p1 /home/balay $ find /usr/lib64 -name bin /usr/lib64/qt5/bin /usr/lib64/R/bin > Are the executables contained in > /usr/lib/petsc/bin essential to the user or the developer (should this be in a > -devel subpackage)? Hm - different scripts/utils have different propose. I guess most are useful from devel sub package. > Some of the scripts don't have the executable bit > (/usr/lib/petsc/bin/configureTAS.py, /usr/lib/petsc/bin/extract.py, > /usr/lib/petsc/bin/petsc_tas_style.mplstyle, /usr/lib/petsc/bin/tasClasses.py, > /usr/lib/petsc/bin/xml2flamegraph.py). What is their purpose? I guess some of them can use some cleanup. extract.py likely belongs to bin/maint [and excluded from tarball..] > > The /usr/lib/petsc/conf directory seems to be related to the build process. Is > that correct? These have makefiles that can be included from user/application makefiles - to get compile/link working seamlessly. > If yes, I will delete the directory from the package because > packages shouldn't include these things. This directory even includes > uninstall.py which is undesirable for a packaged program because this is the > package manager's job. Sure - some files might not make sense to be included in a packaging system. > > /usr/share/petsc looks like it contains additional info useful to the > developers, therefore it should be in a -devel subpackage. > > I see that the docs directory contains .buildinfo. Does this directory contain > additional build artifacts (that should be removed)? I guess some of these files should be excluded from tarball. > > The main index.html of the documentation (from the tarball linked at the > beginning of this e-mail) is invalid. It has all the menus but the main part > of the page is blank. The raw HTML is cut off, there's no content and there > are unclosed tags. Hm - since the docs are primarily tested/used at petsc.org - some of that functionality probably doesn't work as raw html - and might need fixes. Satish > > Many of my questions may be trivial but I want to make sure to not break the > package. > > Thanks in advance > >