Were there any failures with the 64 bit build, or did all tests pass? Sturla
On 22/01/15 22:29, Carl Kleffner wrote: > I took time to create mingw-w64 based wheels of numpy-1.9.1 and > scipy-0.15.1 source distributions and put them on > https://bitbucket.org/carlkl/mingw-w64-for-python/downloads as well as > on binstar.org <http://binstar.org>. The test matrix is python-2.7 and > 3.4 for both 32bit and 64bit. > > Feedback is welcome. > > The wheels can be pip installed with: > > pip install -i https://pypi.binstar.org/carlkl/simple numpy > pip install -i https://pypi.binstar.org/carlkl/simple scipy > > Some technical details: the binaries are build upon OpenBLAS as > accelerated BLAS/Lapack. OpenBLAS itself is build with dynamic kernels > (similar to MKL) and automatic runtime selection depending on the CPU. > The minimal requested feature supplied by the CPU is SSE2. SSE1 and > non-SSE CPUs are not supported with this builds. This is the default for > 64bit binaries anyway. > > OpenBLAS is deployed as part of the numpy wheel. That said, the scipy > wheels mentioned above are dependant on the installation of the OpenBLAS > based numpy and won't work i.e. with an installed numpy-MKL. > > For the numpy 32bit builds there are 3 failures for special FP value > tests, due to a bug in mingw-w64 that is still present. All scipy > versions show up 7 failures with some numerical noise, that could be > ignored (or corrected with relaxed asserts in the test code). > > PR's for numpy and scipy are in preparation. The mingw-w64 compiler used > for building can be found at > https://bitbucket.org/carlkl/mingw-w64-for-python/downloads. > > > > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion > _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org http://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
