On Monday, 14 August 2017 at 02:35, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> It also needs some patching, because each library has a different
> SONAME.
Symlinking
libblas.so.3 → libopenblas.so.0
liblapack.so.3 → libopenblas.so.0
is enough to get things linked against BLAS and/or LAPACK to pick up
OpenBLAS instead. A similar symlinking should work for the -devel package.
If the symlinks confuse ldconfig or cause some other issues, linker scripts
can be used instead.
It certainly won't be enough for RPM. There needs to be a libblas.so
pointing to a library with SONAME libblas.so.3, same for lapack.
[...]
It is the job of the distribution to ensure that software uses the
most
efficient BLAS/LAPACK implementation available. Other distributions ship
symlinks ensuring that. The current packaging in Fedora is horrible.
Thinking again, we had this discussion over 3 years ago:
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/352
and another one starting 2 years ago:
https://pagure.io/packaging-committee/issue/588
which is stalled because Orion doesn't have any time lately.
I'd love to see this done properly, but I don't have enough time to work
on this alone. Are you volunteering to patch all blas/lapack
implementations in Fedora to provide drop-in replacements for each other
and address all the issues mentioned in the above tickets? I would support
such effort and would certainly lend a hand.
It'd definitely be a much more productive use of your time than
complaining here.
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora
https://getfedora.org | RPMFusion
http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan