On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 17:55:23 +0100, Sébastien Villemot wrote: > There seem to be several package (at least blacs-mpi and scalapack, > possibly others) who construct the SONAME at build time using the name > of the default MPI implementation. > I guess that makes sense if their ABI changes based on the underlying MPI implementation. But IMO they should fail to build rather than silently build an incompatible binary package if that doesn't match the expected value. > This effectively implies a SONAME change when the name of a given > implementation changes (as in the current case); it also means a SONAME > change when the default implementation changes on a given arch. > > So if I understand your point correctly, one option would be to name the > package libscalapack-openmpi1 on openmpi archs, and libscalapack-mpich1 > on mpich archs (same for blacs-mpi). But I guess this would mean that > changes of default MPI implementation on a given arch would require > sourceful uploads of packages following this scheme, not just binNMUs. > Indeed. Cheers, Julien
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature