lapack 3.0 (OpenGL and ncurses maintainers please take note)
Fri Jul 1 08:37:00 GMT 2005
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
> 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 ]
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 Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
Red Hat, Inc.
More information about the Cygwin-apps