On 12/7/2014 11:03 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
On Dec 7 10:52, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
Hi Marco,
On Dec 6 22:55, Marco Atzeri wrote:
OpenBLAS is an optimized BLAS library based on GotoBLAS2 1.13 BSD version.
OpenBLAS is licensed under the 3-clause BSD license.
http://www.openblas.net/
Having said that, shouldn't the dynamic library be in the openblas
package, or, alternatively, shouldn't the (empty) OpenBLAS package
require libopenblas_dynamic?
I just had a look into the Fedora package where the openblas package
contains the shared library and the basic documentation:
$ rpm -ql openblas
/usr/lib64/libopenblas-r0.2.12.so
/usr/lib64/libopenblas.so.0
/usr/share/doc/openblas
/usr/share/doc/openblas/Changelog.txt
/usr/share/doc/openblas/GotoBLAS_00License.txt
[...]
Nevertheless, it's your call, so you can upload any time.
Btw., where did you get the packaging layout from? On Fedora it
looks like this:
openblas Shared lib
openblas-devel Headers and libs
openblas-static Static lib
openblas-openmp OpenMP version (whatever that means)
openblas-threads Pthreads version (why isn't that in the base package?)
openblas and openblas-devel looks a bit simpler that openblas with
libopenblas-devel and libopenblas_dynamic, IMHO.
Debian
https://packages.debian.org/source/sid/openblas
openblas (source only)
libopenblas-base
libopenblas-devel
No need to maintain the "_dynamic", it just coming from
past builds where I had specific build per core
Corinna