Conversation
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 5e9b0ae36f
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| CB = CBC(IFC,IEL,IFIELD) | ||
| IF (CB(1:1).EQ.'V'.OR.CB(1:1).EQ.'v'.or. | ||
| $ cb.eq.'MV '.or.cb.eq.'mv '.or.cb.eq.'shl') then | ||
| $ cb.eq.'MV '.or.cb.eq.'mv '.or.cb.eq.'snl') then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The boundary selector was changed from cb.eq.'shl' to cb.eq.'snl', but snl is not a recognized BC token elsewhere in the codebase while shl is used for these wall/shell boundaries. With this typo, shl faces no longer enter the velocity-flux surface term path here (and the paired check below), which changes pressure/velocity residual assembly for level-set and wall-function cases that rely on shl boundaries.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
| if [ ! -f netcdf-$VER.tar.gz ]; then | ||
| wget --no-check-certificate -O netcdf-$VER.tar.gz ftp://ftp.unidata.ucar.edu/pub/netcdf/netcdf-$VER.tar.gz | ||
| wget --no-check-certificate -O netcdf-v$VER.tar.gz https://github.com/Unidata/netcdf-c/archive/refs/tags/v$VER.tar.gz | ||
| SUM=`openssl dgst -sha1 netcdf-$VER.tar.gz | sed 's/^.* //'` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The script now downloads netcdf-v$VER.tar.gz but computes the SHA1 on netcdf-$VER.tar.gz, so the checksum check is performed on the wrong filename. In practice this makes integrity validation ineffective (the SUM value is not computed from the downloaded archive), and the surrounding existence check also misses cached netcdf-v... tarballs, forcing unnecessary re-downloads.
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
1 participant
No description provided.