https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861081 https://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=861081#c13 --- Comment #13 from Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.com> 2014-06-18 07:43:30 UTC --- (In reply to comment #12)
We can use the same solution as Debian:
/usr/lib/libblas.so.3 /usr/lib/liblapack.so.3 /usr/lib/blas/* /usr/lib/lapack/ /usr/lib/atlas/* /usr/lib/openblas/*
there *.so.3 created by update-alternatives.
But which variant is better?
/usr/lib/blas/libblas.so /usr/lib/blas/libblas.so.3 /usr/lib/blas/libblas.so.3.5.0
or
/usr/lib/libblas.so
definitely /usr/lib/libblas.so
/usr/lib/blas/libblas.so.3.5.0
Looks like there is no conflict between -devel packages.
Right, they don't share library names. It's also not necessary to have /usr/lib/atlas/* - only /usr/lib/lapack and /usr/lib/blas are necessary because those create the conflict with the alternatives link.
Using of stub libraries is more difficult, in this case we need to patch applications.
No, you only need to patch blas/lapack implementations. But yes, symlinking is easier - if it works. -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.novell.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.