[petsc-dev] Future of make?

Okay, so now builder.py can run vec/examples/tests. There is a framework there for putting in the special test info too. I think it should spit out the results in something that can be interpreted by Buildbot or Hudson. I will put in shared libraries next, and then we need to talk about Fortran mo

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

> > Indeed, is there an equivalent of macports for ipad? > You can use apt-get to install gcc, g++, python, and the necessary system tools (awk, etc.) Sean -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

On Jul 12, 2010, at 10:46 PM, Sean Farley wrote: >./configure ; ./config/builder.py > > should be the only instructions we need :-) > > Fair enough, kind sir. Those are indeed the only instructions for building > PETSc. I was offering instructions on installing gcc / python / etc. on your

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

> >./configure ; ./config/builder.py > > should be the only instructions we need :-) > Fair enough, kind sir. Those are indeed the only instructions for building PETSc. I was offering instructions on installing gcc / python / etc. on your jailbroken iPad :-) Perhaps, I should just make an iPad

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

On Jul 12, 2010, at 10:25 PM, Sean Farley wrote: > I would like to quit using 'make' in favor of builder.py. I have been doing > this myself, but I have to > constantly port the changes people make to the original build. Is there a > reason to maintain make? > > I would like to chime in that

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

> > I would like to quit using 'make' in favor of builder.py. I have been doing > this myself, but I have to > constantly port the changes people make to the original build. Is there a > reason to maintain make? > I would like to chime in that using builder.py is the only way to get PETSc to compi

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 7:40 PM, Barry Smith wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2010, at 7:04 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > > > I would like to quit using 'make' in favor of builder.py. I have been > doing this myself, but I have to > > constantly port the changes people make to the original build. Is there a

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

On Jul 12, 2010, at 7:04 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote: > I would like to quit using 'make' in favor of builder.py. I have been doing > this myself, but I have to > constantly port the changes people make to the original build. Is there a > reason to maintain make? ALL the examples. New stuf

[petsc-dev] Future of make?

I would like to quit using 'make' in favor of builder.py. I have been doing this myself, but I have to constantly port the changes people make to the original build. Is there a reason to maintain make? Also, I pushed preliminary support for dependency checking into builder.py. Matt -- What m