Comment # 15 on bug 1223967 from Atri Bhattacharya

(In reply to Egbert Eich from comment #13)
> (In reply to Atri Bhattacharya from comment #12)
> > (In reply to Egbert Eich from comment #9)
> > > Actually, I believe I got baselibs.conf to work - at least the library part,
> > > haven't looked into the devel packages, yet
> > 
> > My understanding is that devel pkgs do not need to be administered the
> > hwcaps treatment: What happens is that glibc automatically points the .so
> > link in the devel pkg to the hwcaps dir `/usr/lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/`
> > target should both that dir and `/usr/lib64` contain the same name shared
> > object even if the devel .so link target is to the latter. At least that is
> > my reading of how it works with the zlib pkg anyway.
> 
> This would mean that we still need a link from
> glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/liblapack.so.3.12.0 to
> glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/lapack/liblapack.so.3.12.0. Since this would have to
> be created from within baselibs.conf, there is the challenge how to obtain
> the .so version. This could be added to baselibs.conf if it was
> auto-generated from the main spec file.

Yes, we could do with lapack's baselibs.conf the same as we did with openblas's
i.e. generate it dynamically from inside the specfile. I think we are slowly
approaching the point where the baselibs.conf becomes difficult to read as
well, though.

What do we think about doing it the multibuild way instead, something like my
trial in
<https://build.opensuse.org/package/show/home:badshah400:lapackv3/lapack> goes?
Looks more transparent, to me anyway.