more comments about new build system

[Barry Smith]

 Lisandro,

   I understand. But we cannot have
$PETSC_DIR/conf and $PETSC_DIR/$PETSC_ARCH/lib/petsc
both directories have similar contents but very different
types of names.

   Barry


On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Lisandro Dalcin wrote:

> No, No, Barry...
> 
> Sorry, I was not clear enough. I was thinking in having
> 
> * In an 'install' directory
> prefix/bin         (generated executables)
> prefix/include   (all headers)  [ Perhaps prefix/include/petsc? ]
> prefix/lib           ( all petsc *.a and *.so libs)
> prefix/lib/petsc  (all configuration, common and arch-specific)
> 
> So if 'prefix' is '/usr' you do not generate a non standard
> '/usr/conf' directory.
> 
> * In an 'build' directory
> $PETSC_DIR/bin
> $PETSC_DIR/include   (common headers)
> $PETSC_DIR/conf   (common config)
> $PETSC_DIR/$PETSC_ARCH/bin  (generated executables)
> $PETSC_DIR/$PETSC_ARCH/include   (arch-specific headers)
> $PETSC_DIR/$PETSC_ARCH/lib   (*.a and *.so libs)
> $PETSC_DIR/$PETSC_ARCH/lib/petsc  (arch-specific config)
> 
> I think this approach retains some degree of symmetry between 'prefix'
> and $PETSC_DIR, and uses a more standard layout in 'prefix'
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> 
> On 6/12/07, Barry Smith <bsmith at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:
> > 
> >   Ok, so far we have
> > 
> >   prefix/conf
> >   prefix/lib/conf        (or petscconf or petsc)
> >   prefix/etc/conf        (or petscconf or petsc)
> >   prefix/share/conf     (or petscconf or petsc
> > 
> 
>