| 1 |
Il giorno lun, 29/11/2010 alle 22.57 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha |
| 2 |
scritto: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I have a personal suspicion, namely that libcblas.so is (on my |
| 5 |
> system) |
| 6 |
> actually (symlinked to) libgslcblas.so.0, and that maybe cmake reacts |
| 7 |
> because |
| 8 |
> the library filename is not equal its SONAME. Does this make sense? |
| 9 |
> And if |
| 10 |
> yes, what can I do about it? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
No. As I have written already [1] & [2], there is no need for the |
| 13 |
filename and the soname to be related at all |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
What I think the problem could be here is that libblas and |
| 16 |
libcblas/libgslcblas provide two different interfaces; clapack finds |
| 17 |
itself fine with libblas, but it doesn't find the required symbols in |
| 18 |
libcblas, so --as-needed discards the linking. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I don't think I have the libraries around, maybe the tinderbox. |
| 21 |
Otherwise prod me on IRC/Jabber, it's faster, then we can post the |
| 22 |
results. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
[1] http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2010/10/08/linkers-and-names |
| 26 |
[2] |
| 27 |
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/2009/10/27/a-shared-library-by-any-other-name |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Diego Elio Pettenò — “Flameeyes” |
| 31 |
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
If you found a .asc file in this mail and know not what it is, |
| 34 |
it's a GnuPG digital signature: http://www.gnupg.org/ |
Archives