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

Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS



Dear Lumin,

On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 04:24:43PM +0000, Lumin wrote:

> The main purpose for me to write this mail is to notify
> you guys that I'm going to assign MKL a higher priority
> than OpenBLAS via the update-alternative mechanism.
> 
> MKL provides alternatives to e.g. libblas.so.3
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
> intel-mkl provides a magical dispatcher library named libmkl_rt.so,
> which contains symbols of BLAS and LAPACK. This library
> can be used as an alternative to libblas.so.3 and liblapack.so.3 .
> (didn't actually test it. This is still WIP)
> 
> So I'm going to provide these alternatives with a higher priority
> compared to OpenBLAS:
> 
> libblas.so.3  libmkl_rt.so 50
> liblapack.so.3 libmkl_rt.so 50
> libblas.so libmkl_rt.so 50
> liblapack.so libmkl_rt.so 50
> 
> Such non-free package won't be automatically installed. However
> once MKL is installed, the user must means to use it. By the way,
> I'm linking both .so and .so.3 to libmkl_rt.so because the upstream
> didn't give it a SOVERSION ...
> 
> Please let me know if you are object to this :-)
> Sébastien, how do you like this?

I think packaging MKL for Debian is useful, thanks for doing this.

But I disagree with it being higher priority than the other implementations.
This is Debian, and we strongly discourage users from using non-free software.

In my opinion, MKL should rather be of a priority lower than all the other
alternatives (including the BLAS reference implementation).

It’s quite easy to install a package and to forget about it, and users may be
using MKL without really mean it, especially because MKL is not used directly,
since it’s a library.

Having to configure the alternatives system is a good way of expressing one’s
intention to use non-free software, and to be aware of the implications (i.e.
MKL will be used as a library by many other applications).

There is also a licensing issue: using GPL'd software (e.g. GNU Octave) with
MKL is not allowed.

And finally I may well be personally interested in installing your MKL package,
for doing occasional benchmarks. But I don't want to have to modify the default
priorities for my daily usage (I would modify them temporarily for doing those
benchmarks).

Thanks,

-- 
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀  Sébastien Villemot
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁  Debian Developer
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀  http://sebastien.villemot.name
⠈⠳⣄⠀⠀⠀⠀  http://www.debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: