Re: Bring BLAS into pkgsrc, pt. II

["Dr. Thomas Orgis" <thomas.orgis%uni-hamburg.de@localhost>]

Am Thu, 8 Aug 2019 10:18:54 -0500
schrieb Jason Bacon <outpaddling%yahoo.com@localhost>:

> We can certainly import cblas and openblas* without breaking anything, 
> since these are new packages.

Cblas does not make sense without the blas.bl3, same for lapacke.

> Have you tested dependent packages with the new blas/lapack directly, 
> bypassing blas.bl3?  Do we need to worry about breaking anything by 
> upgrading them without converting dependents to use blas.bl3?

The worry point is the upgrade. the new math/blas now depends on
math/lapack, but that still provides the libraries needed for the build
as before. The difference is the changed LAPACK version and the
SOVERSION associated with that.

Apart from that, the lapack/buildlink3.mk and blas/buildlink3.mk files
should work like before, only with lapack being pulled as indirect
dependency by blas. I did not do that much testing, as I always build
my stuff with openblas.

So, if we bump the PKGREVISIONS to trigger re-builds of things, the
import of math/lapack, math/blas, math/openblas* can happen independent
of the introduction of mk/blas.buildlink3.mk.

After mk/blas.buildlink3.mk being introduced, math/cblas and
math/lapacke can follow. They don't exist yet in pkgsrc main.


Alrighty then,

Thomas

-- 
Dr. Thomas Orgis
HPC @ Universität Hamburg