FS#30023 - [lapack] combined PKGBUILD for lapack/blas

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Clemens Buchacher (drizzd) - Saturday, 26 May 2012, 09:41 GMT
Last edited by Ronald van Haren (pressh) - Sunday, 18 November 2012, 12:52 GMT
Task Type General Gripe
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Ronald van Haren (pressh)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 0
Private No

Details

While working on the upgrade of lapack/blas from 3.4.0 to 3.4.1, I found that I had to install blas with pacman -d while the installed version of lapack still depended on blas=3.4.0. I think we could avoid this problem by building lapack/blas as split packages from the same PKGBUILD. If such a change is acceptable, I would work on a patch for that.

Steps to reproduce:

$ cp -r /var/abs/extra/blas .
$ cd blas
$ makepkg -i
[...]
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: lapack: requires blas=3.4.0
==> WARNING: Failed to install built package(s).

makepkg -i -d gives the same error, which I think is a makepkg bug, but installing the built package with pacman -U -d works.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Ronald van Haren (pressh)
Sunday, 18 November 2012, 12:52 GMT
Reason for closing:  Implemented
Additional comments about closing:  lapack 3.4.2 is now a split package with blas
Comment by Ronald van Haren (pressh) - Wednesday, 30 May 2012, 07:48 GMT
I would accept such a patch if it is cleanly implemented.
Comment by Clemens Buchacher (drizzd) - Thursday, 31 May 2012, 19:19 GMT
Here we go. Works as expected for me.
(application/x-gzip)    lapack.tar.gz (8.6 KiB)
Comment by Clemens Buchacher (drizzd) - Saturday, 14 July 2012, 10:24 GMT
Hi Ronald, Have you had a chance to check out my split package PKGBUILD? https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/30023?getfile=8843

The new PKGBUILD already contains the updated version. If you do not like it, please consider applying the version upgrade patches which I posted here instead: https://bugs.archlinux.org/task/30022

Thank you.

Loading...