[petsc-dev] Recommended Petsc Build Procedure

[Dave Nystrom]

Thanks.  So far, I have been using make.

Barry Smith writes:
 > The recommend usage is make
 > 
 > If cmake was found with ./configure it will use it automatically if you do
 > make, if it was not found it will use the legacy make
 > 
 > Barry
 > 
 > On Apr 22, 2012, at 10:19 AM, Dave Nystrom wrote:
 > 
 > > 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
 >