PETSC_ARCH variable --> PETSC_CONF

[Boyana Norris]

Actually GNU make features are the only reason I continue to touch  
make -- without them I would not use it for anything.

Boyana

--
Boyana Norris, Computer Scientist, Argonne National Laboratory
norris at mcs.anl.gov, +1.630.252.7908, http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~norris/

On Nov 30, 2009, at 4:29 PM, Barry Smith wrote:

>
>  Boyana,
>
>    We are going to stop using make before we ever start using GNU  
> make features :-)
>
>   Barry
>
> On Nov 30, 2009, at 4:23 PM, Boyana Norris wrote:
>
>>
>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:59 PM, Barry Smith wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:51 PM, Boyana Norris wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why not recognize both? It's fairly trivial to check for  
>>>> PETSC_CONF if PETSC_ARCH is undefined and internally define  
>>>> PETSC_ARCH using PETSC_CONF.
>>>
>>> This is a make variable. I am not sure that it is trivial to check  
>>> if a variable is set and use something else otherwise in a tidy  
>>> way in make. Plus I had the idea of having two variables that mean  
>>> the same thing.
>>
>> There are a couple of different ways, e.g., one is
>>
>> ifndef PETSC_ARCH
>> ifdef PETSC_CONF
>> PETSC_ARCH=$(PETSC_CONF)
>> else
>> $(error "Make sure the PETSC_CONF environment variable is defined  
>> before running make.")
>> endif
>> endif
>>
>> This is for GNU make, which is pretty widely available, and may  
>> have to be adjusted for ancient systems.
>>
>> Boyana
>>
>>>
>>> Barry
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Boyana
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Boyana Norris, Computer Scientist, Argonne National Laboratory
>>>> norris at mcs.anl.gov, +1.630.252.7908, http://www.mcs.anl.gov/ 
>>>> ~norris/
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:43 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Barry Smith  
>>>>> <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess the argument is that on occasion in the future a certain  
>>>>> number of people will misinterpret the meaning of PETSC_ARCH  
>>>>> frustrating them and us; the number misinterpreting PETSC_CONF  
>>>>> will be much smaller or zero saving people's time and energy.
>>>>>
>>>>> This will be far outweighed by the number of people complaining  
>>>>> about such a change. I agree with them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>> Barry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 30, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Matthew Knepley wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I see the point, but this is one of the oldest parts of PETSc,  
>>>>> and I am hesitant to change one
>>>>> arbitrary name to another without a more convincing reason.
>>>>>
>>>>> Matt
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Barry Smith  
>>>>> <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Lisandro has pointed out to me several times that the variable  
>>>>> name PETSC_ARCH can be confusing; some people may think it is  
>>>>> related to the architecture of the machine and don't understand  
>>>>> that it is an arbitrary name that the user can make up. He  
>>>>> suggested changing it to PETSC_CONF to be clearer.
>>>>>
>>>>> Should we change it? Use something else?
>>>>>
>>>>> Barry
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their  
>>>>> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to  
>>>>> which their experiments lead.
>>>>> -- Norbert Wiener
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> What most experimenters take for granted before they begin their  
>>>>> experiments is infinitely more interesting than any results to  
>>>>> which their experiments lead.
>>>>> -- Norbert Wiener
>>>>
>>>
>>
>