Gentoo Archives: gentoo-science

From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@×××××××.net>
To: gentoo-science@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-science] lapack transition
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 16:02:20
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-science] lapack transition by Peter Bienstman
I just got an email from Clint Whaley on the Atlas mailing list. He's 
sent out 3.7.11 with bugfixes. Given the re-org, should I post a request 
for 3.7.11 on bugzilla? When is the re-org going to happen?

Peter Bienstman wrote:

>On Sunday 21 August 2005 17:33, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote: > > >>I just returned to this list -- what is the "new infrastructure" we are >>"preparing for"? >> >> > >The ability to switch between different lapack implementations (reference, >ATLAS, later perhaps MKL) at run time. > > > >>Could we get a "testing/unstable" Atlas in Portage? Right now, they are >>at 3.7.10, and I only see a 3.7.10 for blas-atlas, not for atlas itself >>or lapack-atlas. I think the x86-64 users will want 3.7.10 across the >>board, and might also want to be able to compile selected code with GCC 4. >> >> > >That's also on the TODO list. > >Peter > >
-- gentoo-science@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-science] lapack transition Peter Bienstman <pbienst@g.o>