[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Fnal request for atlas package input


I definitivelly prefer more packages (one per subarch) than a package that
remove some parts of itself.

And I also prefere this solution than having all libs on each machines.

Finally, using the alternative system sounds good to me.

Thanks for your work, Mt.

On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 11:02:35AM -0500, Camm Maguire wrote:
> Greetings!  Well, the new atlas package is just about working as
> follows:
> generic atlas-specific libs in /usr/lib
> generic drop in replacement blas and lapack libs in /usr/lib/atlas
> subarch-tuned atlas-specific libs in /usr/lib/<subarch>
> subarch-tuned drop in replacement blas and lapack libs in /usr/lib/<subarch>/atlas
> dynamically linked testing binaries in /usr/lib/atlas
> For example, on i386, the generic arch is a Pentium Pro, and the two
> subarchs at present are 3dnowext and xmm.  (Might add p4 before
> release.)
> These libs are *big*.  The lib package now weighs in at about 11MB on
> the i386.  Upstream says there is little we can do to modularize the
> subarch specific stuff.  I might add a debconf option to remove
> unwanted libs.  Will need a warning about the math on the 3dnow
> registers not being ieee compliant anyway.
> Of course, the other two options are:
> 1) just install the generic, let the user rebuild if they like
> 2) separate packages for 3dnow, sse, etc.
> Please let me know what you'd find most useful.
> PS.  What about using the alternative system to allow user switching
> from blas/lapack to atlas versions?
> Take care,
> -- 
> Camm Maguire			     			camm@enhanced.com
> ==========================================================================
> "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens."  --  Baha'u'llah

Reply to: