On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 10:43:03AM +0100, Erik Bray wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Thierry
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 10:00:51AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> >> On 2016-12-02 09:21, Thierry wrote:
> >> >Would it be
> >> >preferable to have this possibility dealt
On Sat, Dec 3, 2016 at 12:55 PM, Thierry
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 10:00:51AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>> On 2016-12-02 09:21, Thierry wrote:
>> >Would it be
>> >preferable to have this possibility dealt at configure time
>>
>> Absolutely. Whatever you do, do *NOT* introduce a n
+1 for the manual (bring your own .pc file) approach to blas configuration.
Otherwise you'd need configure switches for all combinations of
(blas+cblas+lapack) * (cflags+ldflags+libs) which would make it even more
difficult to use.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 03, 2016 at 10:00:51AM +0100, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
> On 2016-12-02 09:21, Thierry wrote:
> >Would it be
> >preferable to have this possibility dealt at configure time
>
> Absolutely. Whatever you do, do *NOT* introduce a new environment variable.
Why ? We do this for various thi
> On 3/12/2016, at 22:00, Jeroen Demeyer wrote:
>
> On 2016-12-02 09:21, Thierry wrote:
>> Would it be
>> preferable to have this possibility dealt at configure time
>
> Absolutely. Whatever you do, do *NOT* introduce a new environment variable.
> Use a configure option instead.
Actually no n
On 2016-12-02 09:21, Thierry wrote:
Would it be
preferable to have this possibility dealt at configure time
Absolutely. Whatever you do, do *NOT* introduce a new environment
variable. Use a configure option instead.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 9:38:01 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
>
>
> > On 2/12/2016, at 21:30, Jean-Pierre Flori > wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 9:24:16 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
> >
> > > On 2/12/2016, at 21:21, Thierry wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > the
> On 2/12/2016, at 21:30, Jean-Pierre Flori wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 9:24:16 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
>
> > On 2/12/2016, at 21:21, Thierry wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > the SAGE_ATLAS_LIB stuff, which allowed to use system blas belongs to
> > SAGE_ROOT/build/pkgs/atl
On Friday, December 2, 2016 at 9:24:16 AM UTC+1, François wrote:
>
>
> > On 2/12/2016, at 21:21, Thierry > wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > the SAGE_ATLAS_LIB stuff, which allowed to use system blas belongs to
> > SAGE_ROOT/build/pkgs/atlas/spkg-install Is it possible to have such
> option
> >
> On 2/12/2016, at 21:21, Thierry wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> the SAGE_ATLAS_LIB stuff, which allowed to use system blas belongs to
> SAGE_ROOT/build/pkgs/atlas/spkg-install Is it possible to have such option
> (perhaps renamed SAGE_BLAS_LIB) available even if openblas is selected as
> the default blas,
Hi,
the SAGE_ATLAS_LIB stuff, which allowed to use system blas belongs to
SAGE_ROOT/build/pkgs/atlas/spkg-install Is it possible to have such option
(perhaps renamed SAGE_BLAS_LIB) available even if openblas is selected as
the default blas, or a specific (SAGE_OPENBLAS_LIB) one ? Would it be
prefe
11 matches
Mail list logo
