LAPACK Archives

[Lapack] build system improvements

Nico,
indeed it was linked to CMAKE?s . Thank you for the pointers
I just tested and committed your patch (rev 1583). It works like a charm.
It will be released in the coming LAPACK release.

I would be interested to look into GitHub. We have that clone out there, we put 
that in place a while ago. But that?s it, we never went any further.
Best,
Julie

On Sep 1, 2015, at 7:18 AM, Nico Schl?mer <nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed> 
wrote:

Hi Julie,

Is this something related to this patch at all? It rather seems connected 
with an upgraded CMake on your side.

You can find more info on the RPATH behavior of CMake on MacOS on [1]. Other 
projects react to this by setting more properties for APPLE targets, e.g., 
[2]. You might want to do the same.

Cheers,
Nico


[1] http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_RPATH_handling#Mac_OS_X_and_the_RPATH 
<http://www.cmake.org/Wiki/CMake_RPATH_handling#Mac_OS_X_and_the_RPATH>
[2] 
https://github.com/Nuand/bladeRF/commit/58d4870221f79f82944aa6bcc78ecf1191a61622
 
<https://github.com/Nuand/bladeRF/commit/58d4870221f79f82944aa6bcc78ecf1191a61622>
On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 8:33 AM julie <julie@Domain.Removed 
<mailto:julie@Domain.Removed>> wrote:
Dear Nico,
I got a warning when applying your patch and testing it on my mac.


CMake Warning (dev):
Policy CMP0042 is not set: MACOSX_RPATH is enabled by default.  Run "cmake
--help-policy CMP0042" for policy details.  Use the cmake_policy command to
set the policy and suppress this warning.
Do you have any idea how to fix this?
Thank you
Julie


On Aug 27, 2015, at 5:46 AM, Nico Schl?mer <nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed 
<mailto:nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed>> wrote:

Hi Julie,

Has this been included into LAPACK yet?

Cheers,
Nico

On Mon, May 18, 2015 at 9:42 AM Nico Schl?mer <nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed 
<mailto:nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed>> wrote:
Dear Julie,

thanks for your response. I've updated some small bits about the build 
system recently and attached them in two patches to this email.
One of the improvements with the patches is that SOVERSION and VERSION are 
now properly set and the proper symlinks are created:
```
liblapack.so -> liblapack.so.3
liblapack.so.3 -> liblapack.so.3.5.0
liblapack.so.3.5.0
```
Since BLAS is shipped with LAPACK and no separate version number is given 
for BLAS, I applied the same there, too.

As a remark, while sending patches forth and back by email might have been 
working out well for you in the past decades, the opportunities offered by 
more modern approaches should probably not be underestimated. In general, 
people have made good experience with hosting their code on GitHub [1], both 
in terms of developer attraction and code maintenance. I'd be happy to help 
you out here, too.

Cheers,
Nico

[1] https://github.com/live-clones/lapack 
<https://github.com/live-clones/lapack>




On Wed, May 6, 2015 at 6:24 AM julie <julie@Domain.Removed 
<mailto:julie@Domain.Removed>> wrote:
Dear Nico,
Thank you for reaching out.
Please send them directly to me.
Sincerely,
Julie

On Apr 26, 2015, at 8:49 AM, Nico Schl?mer <nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed 
<mailto:nico.schloemer@Domain.Removed>> wrote:


Dear LAPACK team,

I assembled a couple of build system improvements for LAPACK, see [1]. How 
do I best send them to you?

Cheers,
Nico


[1] https://github.com/nschloe/lapack/tree/build-system-fixes 
<https://github.com/nschloe/lapack/tree/build-system-fixes>
_______________________________________________
Lapack mailing list
Lapack@Domain.Removed <mailto:Lapack@Domain.Removed>
http://lists.eecs.utk.edu/mailman/listinfo/lapack 
<http://lists.eecs.utk.edu/mailman/listinfo/lapack>



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.eecs.utk.edu/mailman/private/lapack/attachments/20150901/060923d2/attachment.html>

<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