> On 5 Jan 2021, at 1:33 AM, Barry Smith <[email protected]> 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 > >
