fkluknav at redhat.com
Sun Sep 15 19:00:01 UTC 2013
On 09/13/2013 03:44 PM, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 09/13/2013 06:26 AM, Susi Lehtola wrote:
>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 15:24:28 +0300
>> Susi Lehtola <jussilehtola at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 Sep 2013 14:16:46 +0200
>>> Frantisek Kluknavsky <fkluknav at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> Atlas currently bundles Lapack. I want to update Atlas to 3.10.1
>>>> and unbundle Lapack as well. This will require rebuild of dependent
>>>> packages and maybe adding explicit dependency on Lapack.
>>> I'd think twice about debundling. For instance OpenBLAS actually
>>> replaces some LAPACK routines with more efficient implementations, and
>>> because of this OpenBLAS also includes a bunch functions from the
>>> lapack package.
>>> So, please check with ATLAS upstream whether you can safely unbundle
>> Actually, this is stated pretty clearly on the ATLAS page:
>> "At present, it provides C and Fortran77 interfaces to a portably
>> efficient BLAS implementation, as well as a few routines from LAPACK."
>> So, if you remove LAPACK from ATLAS, you'll also prevent compiling
>> LAPACK dependent packages against ATLAS.
> I think you can do -latlas -llapack. The problem with the current atlas
> is that it wants the lapack *source* not just the library as the current
> version did. It would been a bundling exception. Might be okay since
> lapack doesn't change much, probably not many security concerns.
If two packages in two different git repositories use the same source
tarball, is there a (semi)autmatic way to keep them in sync or at least
notify forcefully? Do I have to remember and watch for Lapack rebases?
More information about the devel