[SciPy-user] testing SciPy without ATLAS ;-(

[Gerard Vermeulen]

On Tuesday 28 May 2002 00:02, Pearu Peterson wrote:
> >
> > grepping the output of nm, I found "srotmg" back in the ATLAS libraries
> > on another machine but not in the standard LAPACK/BLAS libraries.
>
> Hmm, where did you get the BLAS libraries? srotmg _is_ in the standard
> BLAS, see
>   http://www.netlib.org/blas/srotmg.f
>
> However, the BLAS included to the standard LAPACK does not contain
> srotmg.f. I have not checked if there are other BLAS functions that are
> missing in LAPACK but probably there are.
>
Yes, indeed I have the BLAS that comes with the standard LAPACK.
>
> So, what are the suggestions if ATLAS is not available:
> 1) to require the standard BLAS and the standard LAPACK?
> 2) or to require the standard LAPACK with the included but incomplete
> BLAS?
>
> I would prefer (1) because linalg claims to have wrappers to the BLAS
> routines. However, if it is common that distributors provide only
> incomplete BLAS, we can consider (2) or let users to complain to
> distributors.
>
> What do you think?
>
Or fixing up BLAS in the way you suggested masking the "post-update
LAPACK routine". Maybe getinfo("blas") can peek into BLAS (using nm) to
see what is available and provide a list of extra fortran sources to
be compiled and are included with SciPy. If you like I can start to look
for them, tonight.

So, it boils down to being most user-friendly: meaning (2), but providing all 
functionality of (1) behind the user's back.

Maybe, we should inform the LAPACK authors/packagers of the missing blas
functionality?

Regards -- Gerard