Bug#878121: OpenBLAS flavors

Frédéric Bonnard frediz at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Oct 10 08:06:55 UTC 2017


Package: src:openblas
Severity: wishlist


--

Dear maintainers,
at the moment there is only one flavor of openblas library package.
Fedora/RedHat provide several other flavors that are compiled differently :

RHEL 7.3 :
$ rpm -qa | grep -i openblas
openblas-threads-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-serial64-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-threads64_-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-openmp64-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-openmp64_-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-devel-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-threads64-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-openmp-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le
openblas-serial64_-0.2.19-4.el7.ppc64le

Fedora : https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=970656

Spec file :
https://src.fedoraproject.org/cgit/rpms/openblas.git/tree/openblas.spec

It would be nice if the functionality available across the distros were closer for
users.
Especially, in HPC, the greatest need is for (i) reentrant serial version; (ii) OpenMP
version. There is also need for 32-bit and 64-bit integer arguments.

I saw in the d/changelog that there used to be OpenMP support ; it caused some
FTBFS later on but that was in the same libopenblas-base.
In your opinion, would it make sense to follow that path and have several binary
packages providing different features ? Also, this way if some feature doesn't work
for some architecture, those could be disabled on those, but other architectures
would still benefit from the feature.
Regards,

F.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/debian-science-maintainers/attachments/20171010/4e1f2095/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the debian-science-maintainers mailing list