[petsc-dev] Single configure script for SuiteSparse package

[Sean Farley]

Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:

> On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Satish Balay wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Jed Brown wrote:
>> 
>> > Satish Balay <balay at mcs.anl.gov> writes:
>> > 
>> > > On Wed, 12 Feb 2014, Abhyankar, Shrirang G. wrote:
>> > >
>> > >> Barry,
>> > >>    Satish and I have attempted to create a single configure script for SuiteSparse installation. It is currently in the branch shri/update-SuiteSparse https://bitbucket.org/petsc/petsc/branch/shri%2Fupdate-SuiteSparse. This change downloads the entire SuiteSparse package and installs all the sub-packages that PETSc currently supports (UMFPACK, CHOLMOD, and KLU). We can of course have selective installation of sub-packages if need be, currently it does not. I know you prefer a 'separate' configure script for each sub-package, but we think a single configure is a better approach. This change also updates PETSc to use the latest SuiteSparse. I've tested it with both debugging and optimized modes (with complex and 64-bit ints) and there was no change needed for UMFPACK or CHOLMOD solver interfaces. Let us know what you think? petsc-devs?
>> > >> 
>> > >
>> > > Note: Apart from--download-suitsparse=1 - --with-suitsparse=1 or
>> > > --with-suitsparse works on ubuntu/linux with preisntalled suitsparse
>> > > [and presumably will work with other suitsparse installs]
>> > >
>> > > And it avoids all the issues with spliting and maintaining our own
>> > > taballs for UMFPACK, CHOLMOD, and KLU [and managing duplicate copies
>> > > of dependencies like AMD, COLAMD libsuitsparse etc.] - and will avoid
>> > > corner-cases like --download-umfpack --with-cholmod-dir= etc..
>> > 
>> > Those packages were never packaged for sane independent-install anyway.
>> > 
>> > However, some distributions have done the work of allowing separate
>> > install of each component.  Could we have the one suitesparse configure
>> > script detect which components are available?
>> 
>> Perhaps its possible. But I suspect it will get tricky wrt detecting
>> the 'liblist' for such partial installs.
>> 
>> Would it not be easier for user to install all 3 packages [if they
>> want to use any one pre-installed packages?] or just use
>> --download-suitsparse?
>> 
>> I think majority of usecases will be covered by --with-suitsparse=1 or
>> --download-suitsparse options.
>
> I see fedora, macports, homebrew all have a single suitsparse package.
>
> BTW: There is an optional dependency on metis from
> suitesparse. Current code [for --download-suitsparse] doesn't use
> this..

If you use metis, you'll need my patch for 64-bit ints. I think there's
an updated version of my patch in the macports repo.