On Wed, 16 Aug 2017 22:57:28 +0200
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler(a)chello.at> wrote:
Dave Love wrote:
> Kevin Kofler writes:
>> If you are talking about the missing RPM AutoProvides:
>> Provides: libblas.so.3()(64bit)
>> does wonders.
>
> I mean you need to get the soname right and ensure that you have
> everything implemented in the replacement library.
Only the soname of the Provides matters. The actual library file can
be a symlink to the monolithic libopenblas.so.0, the dynamic linker
(ld.so) will load it just fine. The soname is only read at link time,
and there, it is fine (and in fact desired) that newly linked
applications get libopenblas.so.0 recorded as the soname, not
libblas.so.3.
>>> Various things have been changed to use openblas on x86 after
>>> some of us agitated.
>>
>> The problem is, "various things" is not enough, we need a plan to
>> ensure ALL things use it.
>
> It's not available for them all as far as I know -- there's an rpm
> macro which says which ones. I'm happy if that's wrong now.
"things" = "packages" here. Surely OpenBLAS should work for all the
BLAS- using packages on x86, especially if we symlink libblas.so to
it. If not, it is a bug either in OpenBLAS or in the package.
OpenBLAS is not available for some exotic architectures, but the
solution there is to build ATLAS (or some other implementation) for
those architectures (and those architectures only) and set up the
symlinks there too.
in F-27+ we should have OpenBLAS available for all active Fedora
architectures
Dan