fenics team mailing list archive

[Anders Logg <logg@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, Sep 10, 2006 at 12:45:01PM -0400, tomtzigt wrote:
> Another element that is needed if we are going to binary releases is some
> reasonable regression test suite. In particular, I have found many issues
> when trying to port 32bit code to 64bit platforms that only pop out if you
> run tests. For numerical software such test suites tend to be a bit
> involved. Maybe the PETSc folks have some insight in this?



> Do we have any ATLAS, uBLAS, or FLAME folks on this list? 

I would guess not so many.

We have started to put some more effort into unit testing on the
DOLFIN side. It's something used extensively at Simula (for PyCC).

/Anders


> Theo
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of logg@xxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Saturday, September 09, 2006 12:35 PM
> To: Theodore Omtzigt
> Cc: dolfin-dev@xxxxxxxxxx; fenics-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [FEniCS-dev] FEniCS package
> 
> Very good! I started to look at putting together a script that
> automatically downloads
> all FEniCS packages and builds a simple binary distribution. This could be
> something to start with. But feel free to find another solution.
> 
> /Anders
> 
> 
> > I have a RedHat Fedora core cluster, several Fedora core workstations,
> > 64-bit SuSE, and Windows. They all have different compilers and
> > environments
> > so I always have something that I need to tweak. I could give it a whirl
> > to
> > see what is involved.
> >
> > Theo
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:fenics-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx]
> > On Behalf Of Anders Logg
> > Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 7:25 AM
> > To: fenics-dev@xxxxxxxxxx; dolfin-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: [FEniCS-dev] FEniCS package
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 08:47:59AM +0200, Garth N. Wells wrote:
> >> I'm not very enthusiastic about this because I'm also concerned that it
> >> is too complicated for a wide range of machines and wouldn't solve the
> >> problem at hand.
> >
> > I won't push this if there is limited interest.
> >
> >> Testing on a larger number of different systems would address part of
> >> the current issue. At least for DOLFIN, almost all developers as far as
> >> I know are running Debian-based systems which is leading to some build
> >> difficulties for users running others systems, primarily due to
> >> different complier and library versions.
> >>
> >> Garth
> >
> > Yes, having an active developer working on a non-Debian system would
> > be a great benefit.
> >
> > /Anders
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> Anders Logg wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 07:15:13PM -0500, Ridgway Scott wrote:
> >> >>> Any thoughts?
> >> >> I think this is a good idea, but it may be a bit complicated to
> >> >> get right for a wide range of machines.
> >> >>
> >> >> 				Ridg
> >> >
> >> > Yes, but we could start with the simplest. In addition, we can provide
> >> > a build script that lets trusted users on different machines
> >> > contribute builds for those machines.
> >> >
> >> > /Anders
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > FEniCS-dev mailing list
> >> > FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> FEniCS-dev mailing list
> >> FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> >> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev
> > _______________________________________________
> > FEniCS-dev mailing list
> > FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> > http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FEniCS-dev mailing list
> FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> FEniCS-dev mailing list
> FEniCS-dev@xxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.fenics.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics-dev