[petsc-dev] forget about libmpiuni completely

Lisandro Dalcin dalcinl at gmail.com
Wed Feb 17 16:44:59 CST 2010

On 17 February 2010 12:00, Matthew Knepley <knepley at gmail.com> wrote:
> I am for a separate mpiuni that get downloaded. I think this makes more
> sense with
> our other packages concepts, and is more modular. We can reuse so much more
> of
> configure as well.

I still fail to see the pros of having a separate mpiuni.

I think you have to put on user's side when taking a decision about
this. Are FINAL USERS going to have any benefits for having mpiuni as
a separate download and having to pass a separate library in when
invoking the  linker? If a user wants no-MPI, Is there any other
fake-mpi alternative supported in PETSc? If the answer is no, so then
why bother people with a separate download?

Lisandro Dalcin
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594

More information about the petsc-dev mailing list