Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow for system libraries #28

Open
corbett5 opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 5 comments
Open

Allow for system libraries #28

corbett5 opened this issue Apr 24, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@corbett5
Copy link
Contributor

When a host config directly defines the path to a tpl we should use that installation instead of building our own and also use that installation for any dependencies of that tpl. For example when using a system version of hdf5 we shouldn't build hdf5 and then we also need to build axom and conduit against that system version.

@sheltongeosx
Copy link

sheltongeosx commented Sep 12, 2019

Greatly, completely agree!
Currently I have to figure out how to modify CMakeLists file so that to use my system libraries such as hypre, scotch etc. to build PETSC.
(Sorry, I mean to put this comment to issue #58)

@corbett5
Copy link
Contributor Author

If you make those changes, could you put them up in a PR? That would be great to have. The way I see it would be some combination of the logic in the main cmake file here and SetupGeosxThirdParty.cmake in the main repo.

@TotoGaz
Copy link
Contributor

TotoGaz commented Sep 13, 2019

Hi @corbett5 @sheltongeosx!
I'm willing to make a suggestion on how we could solve this kind of problems.
Probably I'll start little (with a not so crucial nor so big dependency so I can receive comments from the community).
If it's OK then we see how we scale up on the problem.

@TotoGaz TotoGaz self-assigned this Sep 13, 2019
@TotoGaz TotoGaz added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 14, 2019
@rrsettgast
Copy link
Member

We should always put changes that fixed a problem you were having up in PR. That way we can collectively figure out how to address the issue in a general sense.

@TotoGaz
Copy link
Contributor

TotoGaz commented Jan 13, 2021

Do we really want to address this in a close (?) future?
Current directions do not aim this, so I would close the issue for the moment.
It hasn't moved for ages and this will not change.

@TotoGaz TotoGaz removed their assignment Jul 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants