This is the mail archive of the
cygwin-apps
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
Re: lapack 3.0 (OpenGL and ncurses maintainers please take note)
- From: Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- To: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
- Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 10:37:12 +0200
- Subject: Re: lapack 3.0 (OpenGL and ncurses maintainers please take note)
- References: <20050630085833.GA21074@calimero.vinschen.de> <20050630124005.72112.qmail@web31514.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
- Reply-to: cygwin-apps at cygwin dot com
On Jun 30 05:40, James R. Phillips wrote:
> --- Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> > I'd opt for /opt (sorry for the pun). Bigger and more complex packages
> > are better served by getting their own /opt subdir in the long run.
> > Charles is asking for /opt for a while now anyway. Perhaps the lapack
> > package would be a good start.
> >
>
> Please look over the directory structure of the trial binary package at
>
> ftp://antiskid.homelinux.net/pub/lapack
>
> It doesn't seem all that complex to me, but if it passes the "/opt complex"
> threshold for you, please advise how package subtrees would best be
> reallocated. I.E. should /opt have its own share/doc subtree, etc.
The /usr/lib/lapack packaging is fine with me, I had just the idea
that your own /opt/lapack dir could help with the local optimized
stuff. For instance consider
/opt/lapack/default/bin <- Contains the non-opimized DLLs
/opt/lapack/bin <- is empty
Now the build instruction for the optimized build are so that the
optimized stuff will be installed to /opt/lapack/bin and your
/etc/profile.d/lapack.(c)sh file tests roughly like this:
if [ -f /opt/lapack/bin/cyglapack.dll ]
then
PATH=$PATH:/opt/lapack/bin
else
PATH=$PATH:/opt/lapack/default/bin
fi
It would help to keep everything in one place. As I said, I'm also
ok with using /usr/lib/lapack, but using /opt here looks neater to me.
Corinna
--
Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:cygwin@cygwin.com
Red Hat, Inc.