Not a problem at all... and like I say... it's probably the right thing to do for now.  I guess more than anything I wanted to get the info out there that NOX can be used without Epetra and even _with_ Petsc.  Maybe one day that will be possible with libMesh...


On Sep 17, 2008, at 1:06 PM, Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG) wrote:

Ahh...  My bad.  Since I was messing with configure I decided to fix a (incorrectly perceived) mistake.  Sorry.


----- Original Message -----
From: <>
To: <>
Sent: Wed Sep 17 11:58:50 2008
Subject: [Libmesh-devel] NOX Configure Test

It looks like someone (Ben?) moved the NOX configure test to be nested 
inside of the configure test for Trilinos.

The reason I didn't do this initially is that it's actually possible 
to use NOX without the rest of Trilinos.  In fact, you can even use 
NOX with Petsc Vectors!  Currently that's not possible with the way 
I've implemented NoxNonlinearSolver in libMesh... but I left the 
possibility open for configuring the library with NOX support and 
_without_ the rest of Trilinos hoping that eventually we could try to 
use NOX with Petsc vectors (NOX, in fact, supports many different 
numeric data structure implementations).

I'm not opposed to leaving it nested for now (since it _is_ required 
to have Epetra to use NoxNonlinearSolver for now)... but I just 
thought I would provide some insight into why I didn't do that in the 
first place.


This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
Libmesh-devel mailing list