RFC: Changing the debian system default BLAS/LAPACK implementation
Hi Science team,
It's needless to introduce the importance of BLAS/LAPACK to you. Let me
directly put forward the question:
Are we satisfied with the performance of default BLAS/LAPACK provider?
(which is exactly netlib, without optimization)
Should we change the system default?
I can think of two kinds of solutions, as listed below
(type 1) let's bump the global default
--------------------------------------
https://salsa.debian.org/science-team/lapack/-/blob/master/debian/shlibs.local
Here is the dependency template used by dpkg-shlibdeps when generating the .deb files.
If we change the template, all the reverse dependency will have a
updated list of providers.
Currently the template is:
"libblas3 | libblas.so.3"
An updated template may looks like this:
"libopenblas0 | libblis3 | <...> | libblas3 | libblas.so.3"
(type2) leave the flexibility to individual maintainers
-------------------------------------------------------
In this way I can implment a lintian check: When a blas/lapack reverse
dependency does not Depends, nor Recommends/Suggests some faster
implementations, the lintian check produces a info saying the details
about performance.
And the package maintainers decide what to use. e.g.
Package: foobar
Depends: libopenblas0 | libblas3 | libblas.so.3
Recommends: libmkl-rt [amd64]
-----
Which way do you prefer?
---
Ack: GSoC2020
Reply to: