1 |
I just got an email from Clint Whaley on the Atlas mailing list. He's |
2 |
sent out 3.7.11 with bugfixes. Given the re-org, should I post a request |
3 |
for 3.7.11 on bugzilla? When is the re-org going to happen? |
4 |
|
5 |
Peter Bienstman wrote: |
6 |
|
7 |
>On Sunday 21 August 2005 17:33, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: |
8 |
> |
9 |
> |
10 |
>>I just returned to this list -- what is the "new infrastructure" we are |
11 |
>>"preparing for"? |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> |
14 |
> |
15 |
>The ability to switch between different lapack implementations (reference, |
16 |
>ATLAS, later perhaps MKL) at run time. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> |
19 |
> |
20 |
>>Could we get a "testing/unstable" Atlas in Portage? Right now, they are |
21 |
>>at 3.7.10, and I only see a 3.7.10 for blas-atlas, not for atlas itself |
22 |
>>or lapack-atlas. I think the x86-64 users will want 3.7.10 across the |
23 |
>>board, and might also want to be able to compile selected code with GCC 4. |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> |
26 |
> |
27 |
>That's also on the TODO list. |
28 |
> |
29 |
>Peter |
30 |
> |
31 |
> |
32 |
-- |
33 |
gentoo-science@g.o mailing list |