This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps@cygwin.com
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: PCYMTNQREAIYR (Was Re: cygwin packaging approach for atlas3.6and lapack3)
- From: Igor Pechtchanski <pechtcha at cs dot nyu dot edu>
- To: "James R. Phillips" <antiskid56-cygwin at yahoo dot com>
- Cc: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 23:30:29 -0400 (EDT)
- Subject: Re: PCYMTNQREAIYR (Was Re: cygwin packaging approach for atlas3.6and lapack3)
- References: <20050626172212.52436.qmail@web31505.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Sun, 26 Jun 2005, James R. Phillips wrote:
> --- Igor Pechtchanski wrote:
>
> > <http://cygwin.com/acronyms/#PCYMTNQREAIYR>. Thanks.
>
> I use web mail for my cygwin mailing list interactions, so I can access
> from work or from home. Unfortunately, I don't see a way to configure
> this for yahoo web mail. But I can manually fix it up, and will try to
> remember to do so. Thanks for the reminder.
Yeah, with web mail hand-editing seems to be the only alternative.
Thanks for doing this. FWIW, if many people request such a feature (or if
GMail introduces it), I'm sure Yahoo will give in and implement it.
I do know, however, that Yahoo mail respects the Reply-To: header --
please let it do so. Discussions like the one below should take place on
the mailing list, so that they are in the archives.
> > Building a DLL isn't hard. Writing a function that dlopen's a DLL and
> > checks for the return value isn't very hard either. This isn't
> > systems-level stuff... It all depends on the amount of time you'd like to
> > invest in this, of course.
>
> Fair point. If I see a payoff, I'll investigate further.
Someone else (Bas van Gompel) just proposed a "wrap" program that does the
same for executables. I wonder if he'd be willing (or if it's too much
effort) to extend this to DLLs...
> > This is not a question of release cycles. If someone reinstalls the
> > current version of lapack, they'll lose the optimized atlas DLLs just
> > as surely as they would on an upgrade. Besides, if there are
> > packaging or Cygwin-specific problems, you may want to make a few
> > Cygwin releases based on the same upstream versions of lapack/atlas,
> > which the users would have to upgrade to.
> >
> > How does the Linux version of atlas handle these issues? Does it use
> > symlinks to shared libraries?
>
> The debian atlas version seems very elegant, but I haven't completely
> figured out how it works. I don't think symlinks are involved more than
> with normal shared libraries. [All linux shared libraries use symlinks
> from major version library names to abi compliant minor versions. This
> allows libraries to be updated without requiring software that uses the
> libraries to be recompiled].
FWIW, Windows doesn't support anything like that. Welcome to DLL hell.
> Basically the maintainer collected optimization-response records from
> atlas users on several archs, and feeds the responses artifically into
> the atlas optimizer, so you can compile optimized code for these archs
> without necessarily having that arch. He maintains separate binary
> packages for several archs, and you can run the actual optimization if
> you install the source package.
>
> debian packaging makes cygwin packaging look extremely simple.
Good to know. :-)
> There may be a way to use symlinks with pre-install/post-install scripts
> to alleviate the problems you are identifying. I will give that some
> thought.
As mentioned above (though not very clearly), symlinks to DLLs don't work
in Windows. Hard links do, but those are only supported on NTFS, and an
upgrade will break them anyway. I can't think of a way to do this without
a wrapper DLL, but that's why this should stay on the list -- perhaps
others will be able to find better solutions.
Igor
--
http://cs.nyu.edu/~pechtcha/
|\ _,,,---,,_ pechtcha@cs.nyu.edu
ZZZzz /,`.-'`' -. ;-;;,_ igor@watson.ibm.com
|,4- ) )-,_. ,\ ( `'-' Igor Pechtchanski, Ph.D.
'---''(_/--' `-'\_) fL a.k.a JaguaR-R-R-r-r-r-.-.-. Meow!
"The Sun will pass between the Earth and the Moon tonight for a total
Lunar eclipse..." -- WCBS Radio Newsbrief, Oct 27 2004, 12:01 pm EDT