Trilinos packages

[Nico Schlömer]

> i suspect that the clean way would be (binary) packages for each library
> the trilinos source package contains.

I fully agree. Trilinos is structurally similar to Boost which does
provide a sophisticated install structure. Unfortunately, the Trilinos
build system is flawed in certain places that make it difficult to
take an automated approach to that. One example is that the
interdependencies of the subpackages aren't presented in a
machine-readable form. Although, I'm submitting patches to Trilinos to
address these issues, I would suggest to first go with a monolithic
package and split it up at a later point.

In the course of packaging Trilinos for Debian, I have identified
quite a number of bugs in Trilinos for which I maintain a little zoo
of patches, https://github.com/nschloe/trilinos-ubuntu/tree/master/patches.
Some of those have already made it upstream, and we'll have to see if
we can get in more of those before the next release freeze.

I'll keep you all posted.

Cheers,
Nico



On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:56 PM, Felix Salfelder <felix at salfelder.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 12:15:49PM +0100, Nico Schlömer wrote:
>> A quick poll on the Trilinos package naming:
>> Right now, we have "libtrilinos", which triggers a
>> package-name-doesnt-match-sonames warning since none of the Trilinos
>> libraries is called libtrilinos.* (rather libepetra.*, libbelos.*,
>> ...). This is similar to the libboost package which doesn't contain a
>> library by the name libboost.* either.
>
> i suspect that the clean way would be (binary) packages for each library
> the trilinos source package contains. and maybe have a trilinos-dev
> metapackage that depends on all the lib*-dev packages. this will add up
> to some copy and paste work, and end up with a lot of packages... i
> don't know if it's worth the effort.
>
> fwiw, theres another source package that creates a heap of libraries.
> it is the old trilinos package [1]. here, all sonames are prefixed by
> "libtrilinos_". looks like an alternative...
>
>> On the other hand, a software very similar to Trilinos, PETSc, goes by
>> the Debian name "petsc".
>
> i cannot find a (binary) package called "petsc". but there is (e.g.)
> libpetsc3.4.2, and it contains libpetsc.so.4.3.2. unkike trilinos, the
> petsc source package creates just one shared library. and afaics its
> soname matches the package name.
>
> hth
> felix
>
> [1] https://packages.debian.org/squeeze/amd64/libtrilinos/filelist