On Saturday, June 8, 2013 6:35:49 PM UTC+2, Volker Braun wrote: > > On Saturday, June 8, 2013 5:14:30 PM UTC+1, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote: > >> The way we use libtool to produce shared libraries of ATLAS is not >> portable. >> > > I agree that this is ugly as sin. At one point we will have to switch Sage > to the new-style shared libraries that upstream introduced, which package > the blas code in a different way. > I know, and i know it is not trivial to do so. I don't criticize what you've done, it's great to be able to use a shared version of ATLAS easily, rather than struggling to use the one packaged by upstream (not even sure the upstream ones would build on Cygwin).
> The current libtool hack is just a stopgap for that. In particular, I > would rather work on abstracting the blas choice into pkgconfig-style > scripts and push that into sage than hardcode slightly different names for > atlas. Then we'll also be able to use different vendors like OpenBLAS and > MKL. > > That would be awesome. Not really important for me, but i definitely had such requests at Sage's meetings. > Until then Cygwin can just use the Cygwin ATLAS libraries IMHO. > I'm less inclined to accept that :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel?hl=en. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
