[petsc-dev] builds of PETSc based packages should not get their own secret files

[Pierre Jolivet]

> On 5 Jan 2021, at 1:33 AM, Barry Smith <bsmith at petsc.dev> wrote:
> 
> 
>  For packages that are built after PETSc configure (and or install is done) slepc, hpddm etc we've traditional saved the output  in its own file stashed away somewhere. 
> 
>  For the CI this is driving me nuts because when they fail the output is essentially "lost" and thus it is impossible to determine what has gone wrong. 
> 
>  I have started to directly output in the same stream as the PETSc compiles to make debugging much easier. Generally the packages are relatively small and don't have a huge amount of output when compiling correctly.  I did it for PETSc4py and SLEPc (slepc4py is a mystery yet how it get's hidden in slepc). 

I guess we could change the redirect rule here https://gitlab.com/slepc/slepc/-/blob/master/config/packages/slepc4py.py#L53 <https://gitlab.com/slepc/slepc/-/blob/master/config/packages/slepc4py.py#L53>?
But we’d need to check whether slepc4py is built with --download-slepc --download-slepc-configure-arguments="--download-slepc4py” (inside PETSc) or simply --download-slepc4py (inside SLEPc).

I’m in favour of having a single file because it can be quite nightmarish to ask users for multiple .log files hidden in different folders, but I can understand if we stick with the current approach as well.

Thanks,
Pierre

>  Are there any large downsides to this plan?
> 
>  Barry
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.mcs.anl.gov/pipermail/petsc-dev/attachments/20210105/ed40160f/attachment.html>