[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Liblapack.so, libblas.so etc. version numbers? (working on wip/cblas and wip/lapacke)
On 06/11/18 11:23, Dr. Thomas Orgis wrote:
Am Mon, 11 Jun 2018 11:15:15 -0500
schrieb Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>:
I would be inclined to cooperate with upstream's choice of soversion,
but this does present a potential problem of an soversion going
backwards with the next update. I'm not sure what the ramifications are
How is the process to come to a decision there? I must admit that I am
not really affected by the update procedure as I always build a fresh
pkgsrc tree and keep it that way.
IMHO, a switch in the version and an additional symlink libblas.so.4 →
libblas.so.3 should work to keep binaries happy.
I'll investigate how the cmake build might work for us … not sure yet
if all switches are there.
Here's the sum total of committed packages using blas and lapack:
[root@centosdev pkg-dev]# pkg-grep blas/build -l|grep -v ^wip
[root@centosdev pkg-dev]# pkg-grep lapack/build -l|grep -v ^wip
Shouldn't be too hard to determine the impact of an soversion change.
Since they all just include the bl3 file, should be a pretty easy fix
too. The .4 symlink would probably do it, if it's even necessary.
Main Index |
Thread Index |