[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Bring BLAS into pkgsrc, pt. II
On 2019-08-09 08:41, Dr. Thomas Orgis wrote:
I think we'll basically have to commit everything at once. Probably
multiple commits, but with no delay between.
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.
Looks like the next step is to clear up any pkglint and stage QA issues
in the wip packages.
Try running pkglint -e -Wall in each package dir.
Do you have PKG_DEVELOPER=yes in your mk.conf?
I cleaned up wip/blas a bit, but there are still a couple issues flagged
by pkglint that relate to previous discussions.
Main Index |
Thread Index |