Bug#897238: Re: Bits about Intel MKL packaging -- Higher Priority than OpenBLAS
On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 11:49:05PM +0800, Drew Parsons wrote:
>
> I wonder if the simplest solution is to just have
> intel-mkl Depends: libblas. i.e. use policy to simply prevent a sole
> mkl installation.
>
> That way, the mkl alternative will always have a free BLAS to press
> it's preference against.
That's exactly a part of the present implementation.
It depends on libblas3 | libblas.so.3, and enhances libblas.so.3, but
never provides libblas.so.3 . Similar for lapack.
Reply to: