fenics team mailing list archive

["Johannes Ring" <johannr@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, August 1, 2008 15:02, Kent-Andre Mardal wrote:
> On fr., 2008-08-01 at 14:22 +0200, Anders Logg wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 01:12:08PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Anders Logg wrote:
>> > > On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 12:53:34PM +0100, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Johannes Ring wrote:
>> > >>> On Fri, August 1, 2008 13:09, Kent-Andre Mardal wrote:
>> > >>>> On fr., 2008-08-01 at 12:20 +0200, Johannes Ring wrote:
>> > >>>>> On Fri, August 1, 2008 12:17, Garth N. Wells wrote:
>> > >>>>>> Johannes Ring wrote:
>> > >>>>>>> Hi Jiping,
>> > >>>>>>>
>> > >>>>>>> I think this segfault problem must have been introduced when I
>> added
>> > >>>>>>> Trilinos as a dependency to the DOLFIN Ubuntu packages.
>> > >>>>>> Why do we have Trilinos as a dependency for the package? I
>> don't see
>> > >>>>>> what this adds for the user at this stage.
>> > >>>>> Well, if it doesn't add anything to the user, I can simply
>> remove it.
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>>> Johannes
>> > >>>>>
>> > >>>> Agree that dolfin should not depend on trilinos. Does the dolfin
>> package
>> > >>>> depend on PETSc ?
>> > >>> Yes, it depends on PETSc.
>> > >>>
>> > >>>> More general, should the dolfin package be minimalistic or
>> > >>>> maximalistic ?
>> > >>> I thought maximalistic, but I guess this is up to others to
>> decide.
>> > >>>
>> > >> I would say maximalistic in terms of available Ubuntu packages
>> (e.g.
>> > >> OpenMPI, PETSc, umfpack, etc), and minimalistic in terms of
>> home-made
>> > >> packages (e.g. Trilinos).
>> > >>
>> > >> On this note, SCOTCH is package under Ubuntu 8.10.
>> > >>
>> > >> Garth
>> > >
>> > > I don't think it's a problem to depend on Trilinos and other
>> > > "home-made" packages now that they are available from the same
>> > > repository as the FEniCS packages.
>> > >
>> > > The packages are in the same repository and built by the same person
>> > > so the Trilinos package can be trusted just as much as for example
>> > > the FFC package.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Home-made packages increase the testing burden, while in the case of
>> > Trilinos not substantially affecting functionality. If at some point
>> > Trilinos provides substantial functionality, e.g. when parallel
>> assembly
>> > and solve is supported, then it could/should be a dependency.
>> >
>> > Also, if an aim is to eventually have fenics accepted as Debian/Ubuntu
>> > package isn't easier if as few new packages as possible are required?
>> >
>> > Garth
>>
>> Good point.
>>
>> If there is need for it, we could add a second package dolfin-trilinos
>> which does depend on Trilinos, but I suspect most people who want to
>> use Trilinos will build DOLFIN from source?
>>
>
> Fine with me. I build Dolfin from the sources and use the trilinos
> package of Johannes.

The segmentation fault problem with the 64 bit packages is now fixed. I
decided to let the DOLFIN packages still depend on Trilinos, but I
compiled new packages for Trilinos, this time without MPI.

Johannes