[petsc-dev] Recommended Petsc Build Procedure

[Dave Nystrom]

OK.  I'll mail the configure.log to petsc-maint.  But this did not start out
as a configure problem - I was just asking for a recommendation on usage.
And the response you cite below was to Aron before I received your response.

Matthew Knepley writes:
 > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 10:57 AM, Dave Nystrom <Dave.Nystrom at tachyonlogic.com> wrote:
 > 
 > > I have cmake on my system but configure.log does not document that
 > > approach.
 > >
 > 
 > We did not find it. This is a configure question, and should be mailed to
 > petsc-maint, not the dev list.
 > 
 > 
 > > What is your build command to build petsc with cmake?
 > >
 > 
 > make
 > 
 >    Matt
 > 
 > 
 > > Thanks,
 > >
 > > Dave
 > >
 > > Aron Ahmadia writes:
 > >  > I use the CMake build because it's the fastest, though it requires you
 > > to
 > >  > have CMake installed on your system.
 > >  >
 > >  > A
 > >  >
 > >  > On Sun, Apr 22, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Dave Nystrom <Dave.Nystrom at tachyonlogic.com> wrote:
 > >  >
 > >  > > At the end of configure.log, there are two possible ways to build
 > > petsc-dev
 > >  > > that are specified.  Which is the recommended way to build - using
 > > make or
 > >  > > using python?  I have been using make.
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Also, one is labeled as legacy and one is labeled as experimental.
 > >  That
 > >  > > gives the impression of having a choice between an old, archaic
 > > method or a
 > >  > > new, experimental approach.  Should one just be labeled as production?
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Thanks,
 > >  > >
 > >  > > Dave
 > >  > >
 > >
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > -- 
 > 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