[Developers] [knarf at cct.lsu.edu: Re: [Users] [Einstein Toolkit] #131: Cactus produces way too much output with SILENT!=no]

Frank Loeffler knarf at cct.lsu.edu
Mon Dec 6 14:44:03 CST 2010

On Mon, Dec 06, 2010 at 03:38:54PM -0500, David Rideout wrote:
> Oh I had not understood that you plan to do away with the old format.
> Why not allow both and see how it goes?  Maybe someone has a clever
> script with parses the old output.  Seems better to have a trial
> period at least in which both are supported.

Yes, that was my original proposal. However, then we do need either a
new value for SILENT, or an entirely different variable name which would
then be able to clash with SILENT.

I proposed SILENT="yes", despite the obvious non-silentness. Otherwise
there could be BRIEF="yes" - but then what should we do with
BRIEF=yes SILENT=no? I would rather like to have just one variable
handling this, and I didn't want to change the current name because a
lot of users are probably very used to it now.


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 835 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.cactuscode.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20101206/fb7d1180/attachment.bin 

More information about the Developers mailing list