[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #32120] complex times complex failure

From: John W. Eaton
Subject: [Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #32120] complex times complex failure
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 04:35:53 +0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130917 Firefox/17.0 Iceweasel/17.0.9

Follow-up Comment #19, bug #32120 (project octave):

Sincd people often replace the blas library that Octave is linked to with some
accelerated version, maybe the configure test is not all we need here.  We can
get that test right and then someone can use dynamic linker tricks or just
replace the system library with some other version and still be screwed. 
Maybe we need to also perform the configure checks when Octave starts and
refuse to run if the blas library looks like it is not working properly?

Is Octave being compiled with -ff2c?  If so, then I think all Fortran
libraries will need to be compiled this way.  Are they?

Looking at the configure tests, it seems that the wrapper that we are using on
OS X systems is supposed to work without using -ff2c.

Is Apple's veclib compiled with f2c conventions or not?  the comments in
blaswrap.c say that it is, but if we are using that code, we should not be
using -ff2c to compile the Fortran bits of Octave.

If we use cblas, is it still possible for people to replace the blas library
by using dynamic linker tricks or by replacing the blas and lapack shared
libraries, or do they then have to also replace the clas library?  I guess
this question is really asking whether cblas is just a wrapper library or if
it actually provide the implementation of the blas library.


Reply to this item at:


  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]