From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id bRBPJBwsDWFCGgAAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 14:33:32 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id ILFuHxwsDWEbLAAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 12:33:32 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1118C195C5 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 14:33:32 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:52568 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBz2Z-0002Vu-2m for larch@yhetil.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 08:33:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57572) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBz2G-0002VI-Nz for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 08:33:12 -0400 Received: from smtp.hosts.co.uk ([85.233.160.19]:57350) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mBz2C-00043D-Mm; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 08:33:12 -0400 Received: from maikeh336.claranet.co.uk ([79.123.23.187] helo=pancake.local) by smtp.hosts.co.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim) (envelope-from ) id 1mBz24-00065K-DX; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 13:33:01 +0100 Message-ID: <09853afc81b10c34eeb29332a73a968cbfe41b21.camel@tourbillion-technology.com> Subject: Re: LAPACK vs. OpenBLAS From: Paul Garlick To: guix-devel@gnu.org, ludo@gnu.org Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 13:32:59 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5-0ubuntu0.18.04.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Received-SPF: none client-ip=85.233.160.19; envelope-from=pgarlick@tourbillion-technology.com; helo=smtp.hosts.co.uk X-Spam_score_int: -6 X-Spam_score: -0.7 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.7 / 5.0 requ) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1628253212; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=v/ZVly+ySLK6XWFDNtGxju8KySKUwkNyCkdzPlJhhZQ=; b=ZnYuX57NbDqVLoiGqcd+m31i6QDxG8Cc+Xe1mizpzaEEiCCqOpdX/SJV0GJUB1QwFdCD4E F2KMX0wzhXLfuHMuxi7n1UYCuT2Lgj9iatXEFQN1ZXqUoJE8+iz7Okhj4XVIMn1gnWGnDf K+yHlCIYKFl9E3p0Br9ExP1CzIhJAUIgiTIzP00BTfrEevxo2yc7SizKz2BsBbW/3xLrGs iSYCHY82t97wP59qUVKo7gcQ06dd18tDSgn0/WNmcxMEHbpN6gFVAbLa/5LFr7rL8uHdKn +ELCjArKUirpTHqOtOoxgj2j/tjZHXpsusKrSAP5Xd0gd+5gMnlM51mePTs6KQ== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1628253212; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=fVFuWUaqCC6uejaXnWrpwYXy60e9lDHbdyZQqCjbU1FjdTa6GzleVUc/RcRtiu0/o5hejH mVL732cUDKibzDb3CCJVCy4Rx5p4X3+AU7tN+3QBta19B94jz8Cusnf+Seqpd0ZIXDrHqu 5GXhcqkYvodD25n1G9Ni+iZHE1n+yRi9pQoPEwMoaqtVDIPgjV1lVMJEfxNl1PQPa9mjC1 HVMs+Hm11M5UisIoaSMoMV6vqUjOlM3RCSbUp9F7W2ltRirCJ/3mbiCbnw2jZ9ZxIgSODQ m9Hrs+Jf0RLVhNyYqZVFtQJF+tVUlLM2nCl0Ibaa1pixsJwaG/YrcPbESnA+BA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.92 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 1118C195C5 X-Spam-Score: -0.92 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: K4RSZiQyBPQ1 Hi Ludo, > A surprisingly large number of packages depend on ‘lapack’: > Perhaps we could have a lint checker warning against the use of lapack. Good idea. Possibly with a helpful message along the lines of 'the openblas package provides a LAPACK interface'. I encountered this issue when packaging an optimization package [0] recently. The build system, cmake, requires a path to the BLAS_LIBRARY and also a path to the LAPACK_LIBRARY. One can see how the shared library liblapack.so, provided by the lapack package, could be the first (but mistaken) choice for the packager. I notice that Debian [1] use NO_LAPACK=1 as an extra make option for openblas. This has the effect of generating a liblapack.so file. For the case of optizelle, the package I was working on, I labelled the openblas input as "blas/lapack" to make it clear that the package has a dual purpose. Best regards, Paul. [0] https://hpc.guix.info/package/optizelle [1] https://sources.debian.org/src/openblas/0.3.13+ds-3/debian/rules/