On Mon, 2010-02-08 at 14:44 +0100, Sylvestre Ledru wrote: > Hello Adam, > > Le lundi 08 février 2010 à 08:39 -0500, Adam C Powell IV a écrit : > > Hello, > > > > Some time ago, the netlib and ATLAS implementations of BLAS and LAPACK > > were ABI-compatible, and used alternatives symlinks to access their > > different libraries with the same ABI. > I didn't know that. That > > > I don't know when it happened, but at some point they diverged, and now > > the netlib packages have libblas-3gf.so and liblapackgf-3.so, and ATLAS > > has libblas-3.so and liblapack-3.so. > > > > I know that ATLAS has its own API as well, but it was nice back in the > > day to be able to build to the netlib API, and then swap them back at > > forth at runtime using update-alternatives. > Are you sure ? That API is supposed to be the BLAS one. Of course, I meant that I think ATLAS has its own additional calls, as well as the standard netlib BLAS API. Sorry I wasn't clear. > > Are they no longer ABI-compatible? Is it possible to get back to the > > old state of things? > As far as I know, they are probably compatible but we would have to dig > deeper to make sure of that. > > I would be happy to put this behavior back, especially since this would > fix the first point described here: > http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-scicomp-devel/2009-October/004582.html Makes sense. Will reply separately to Axel's post... -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