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

Re: blacs-mpi/scalapack transition



Hello Muammar,

On Sun, 2009-10-18 at 15:07 -0430, Muammar El Khatib wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> 
> On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 12:54 PM, Adam C Powell IV <hazelsct@debian.org> wrote:
> > On Sat, 2009-10-17 at 20:16 -0430, Muammar El Khatib wrote:
> >
> >> I have uploaded a revision of scalapack in mentors.d.n:
> >> http://mentors.debian.net/debian/pool/main/s/scalapack/
> >>
> >> If I understood #549707 correctly scalapack-pvm-test depends on
> >> scalapack1-pvm, but libscalapack-pvm1 is shipped instead and that's
> >> the problem.  So, what I did was to update the debian/shlibs.local
> >> file to make scalapack-pvm-test depends on the correct binary. Please,
> >> correct me if I am wrong with this.
> >
> > Muammar, there is still a problem with shlibs.local, which is that it
> > refers to non-existent packages libscalapack-mpich1 and
> 
> You are right. I forgot to update it for making the package depends on
> the new binary name.
> 
> > libscalapack-lam1 .  I think you switched the shlib package name from
> > libscalapack-mpi1 to libscalapack-openmpi1 to avoid a lintian warning.
> > But the problem is that on architectures where OpenMPI is not available,
> > the shlib soname is libscalapack-lam.so.1 which seems even more
> > inappropriate for a package called libscalapack-openmpi1 .  That's why I
> > created the package names libscalapack-mpi1 and libscalapack-mpi-dev .
> >
> 
> Now I understand you. I hadn't seen this:
> https://buildd.debian.org/pkg.cgi?maint=pkg-openmpi-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
> I will keep the name you created because the changes that I made don't
> have sense knowing this.
> 
> > If in spite of this you would like to keep the package name as
> > libscalapack-openmpi1 I will respect your wishes as the maintainer.  But
> > shlibs.local needs to be modified so all of the shlib package names are
> > the same (libscalapack-openmpi1) before the package can be uploaded.
> 
> No, it is OK for me. Thanks for noticing this.

Okay.  How do you want to proceed?  If you make an updated package, I
can upload it for you; or I can do another NMU.

-Adam
-- 
GPG fingerprint: D54D 1AEE B11C CE9B A02B  C5DD 526F 01E8 564E E4B6

Engineering consulting with open source tools
http://www.opennovation.com/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: