LAPACK Archives

[Lapack] LAPACK: build system, implicit dependencies record

Hi Nico,
Thank you for suggesting an improvement in LAPACK CMAKE build process.
The LAPACK team is currently working directly with the people of Kitware (the 
CMAKE guys). 
Chuck from Kitware is in copy. I would like to get Chuck's opinion on the 
matter before moving on.

On Jan 14, 2011, at 3:04 PM, Nico Schl?mer wrote:

Dear LAPACK team,

I just stumbled across an annoyance when building application code 
against a library which in turn depends on LAPACK and BLAS. The 
application code and library are entirely written in C/C++ and built 
with CMake.

Now, at the final executable linking step, everything is put together, 
including liblapack.a and friends. As the linker would be C++ (for 
example), and whole application code is C++, the build system is not 
aware of the fact that the standard Fortran libraries need to be linked 
as well as LAPACK is on stage. Depending on what LAPACK was built with, 
those "standard libraries" may actually change.

This is a dilemma that's been discussed on the CMake mailing list 
several times 
(,, and of 
course LAPACK is not the only affected library.

As Brad King points out, the clean solution for this situation would be 
that each library that is built provides a file with build info to be 
installed along with the .a file. Many libraries do that via 
*Config.cmake files.

Are there plans within LAPACK to implement a similar thing?

Lapack mailing list

Julie Langou; Research Associate in Computer Science
Innovative Computing Laboratory;
University of Tennessee from Denver, Colorado ;-)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>

For additional information you may use the LAPACK/ScaLAPACK Forum.
Or one of the mailing lists, or