Hallo Jörg-Volker,
On 7 January 2019 at 00:09, Jörg-Volker Peetz wrote: | Package: r-base-core | Version: 3.5.2-1 | Severity: important | | Hi Dirk, | | the library /usr/lib/R/modules/lapack.so contained in this package is | linked to /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libopenblas.so.0 of the package | libopenblas-base. Package libopenblas-base provides the dependency | libblas.so.3. The library libblas.so.3 contained in package | libopenblas-base is already linked to libopenblas.so.0. Therefore, it is | not necessary lo link it to /usr/lib/R/modules/lapack.so, I | think. Rather, it is a bug to link it to /usr/lib/R/modules/lapack.so, | since other packages providing a BLAS library don't contain or provide | libopenblas.so.0. I am little confused what your bug report is. Maybe you are confused too? For 15 or 20 years Debian has had /virtual/ packages for BLAS and LAPACK. r-base-core has a Depends: with Depends: zip, [...], libblas3 | libblas.so.3, [...], liblapack3 | liblapack.so.3 Here the libblas3 and liblapack3 three are the baseline fallback packages, libblas.so.3 and liblapack.so.3 are the virtual package: edd@rob:~$ wajig show libblas.so.3 # wajig is a wrapper around dpkg+apt* No candidate version found for libblas.so.3 Package: libblas.so.3 State: not a real package Provided by: libatlas3-base (3.10.3-7build1), libblas3 (3.8.0-1build1), libopenblas-base (0.3.3+ds-1) edd@rob:~$ So if you installed, say, the atlas rather than openblas package and then did ldd on R's lapack.so, another BLAS would appear. We had this as a plug and play for a long time, and it works. I see no bug here. Tsch"uss aus Chicago, Dirk -- http://dirk.eddelbuettel.com | @eddelbuettel | e...@debian.org
