Subject: Re: the name of math/lapack
To: Adam Ciarcinski <email@example.com>
From: Jeremy C. Reed <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 11/19/2003 09:33:57
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003, Adam Ciarcinski wrote:
> I just wonder why math/lapack is called 'lapack-20010201'.
> It uses the source code dated May 31, 2000, and the website claims it is
> version 3.0 (+ updates).
> Can we, possibly, fix that?
Do you have any suggestions?
FreeBSD's port is named lapack-3.0 although it appears to not be 3.0
(since it has update).
Debian's package is named lapack 3.0.20000531a-25.
The official RPM from http://www.netlib.org/lapack/rpms/ is named
Since the official RPM is called "3_0-2" then we should use same, like:
I don't know about using a small version number now though. But maybe it
will be okay.
Jeremy C. Reed
p.s. I did not CC other email address; it is generally not for technical
discussions; and it should not be cross-posted.