[Pkg-julia-devel] Bug#905826: ILP64 interface of openblas?

[Milan Bouchet-Valat]

Hi,
FWIW, what Fedora did is to ship an additional package with ILP64
libraries (actually two: one with standard symbol names, and one with
the 64_ suffix, which Julia uses to avoid conflicts with libraries that
don't use ILP64). Porting all packages to ILP64 is probably very hard
or impossible at this point.

Best
Le samedi 13 octobre 2018 à 13:22 +0000, Mo Zhou a écrit :
> Package: juliaVersion: 1.0.1-2
> Hi Sebastien, do you have any plan to add ILP64 interface to
> OpenBLAS?I acknowledge that bumping BLAS interface from LP64 to ILP64
> is really ahardwork under Debian's context, and will take a long time
> to transit.
> If there is not much necessity to provide ILP64 interface by the
> OpenBLASpackage, we can ship one in Julia's source tarball.
> ILP64 is already the default interface if one builds Julia againstMKL
> using Debian's packaging script.
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2018 at 11:38:42AM +0200, Milan Bouchet-Valat wrote:
> OK, thanks, I guess it's fine as long as the default is OpenBLAS.
> BTW, it would be very useful to build with USE_BLAS64=1
> OPENBLAS_SYMBOLSUFFIX=64_ to use an ILP64 BLAS. Without this,
> packages using BinaryBuilder/BinaryProvider which call BLAS won't
> install. This affects notably Arpack.jl,which is a dependency of
> several very common packages. (I'm currently workingon this for
> Fedora.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-julia-devel/attachments/20181013/04d465ac/attachment.html>