Package Details: openblas-lapack 0.3.27-1

Git Clone URL: https://aur.archlinux.org/openblas-lapack.git (read-only, click to copy)
Package Base: openblas-lapack
Description: Optimized BLAS library based on GotoBLAS2 1.13 BSD (providing blas, lapack, and cblas)
Upstream URL: http://www.openblas.net/
Licenses: BSD
Conflicts: blas, cblas, lapack, lapacke, openblas
Provides: blas, cblas, lapack, lapacke, openblas
Submitter: sftrytry
Maintainer: thrasibule
Last Packager: thrasibule
Votes: 92
Popularity: 0.197251
First Submitted: 2013-11-20 23:53 (UTC)
Last Updated: 2024-04-09 17:07 (UTC)

Required by (648)

Sources (1)

Latest Comments

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 16 Next › Last »

MarsSeed commented on 2023-12-10 07:47 (UTC) (edited on 2023-12-10 07:48 (UTC) by MarsSeed)

@prs, this does not have additional features, it has less features. And it does not follow repo's new split package structure and its naming structure. Also, pacman now wants to always replace this with repo's blas-openblas, as that package together with its mandatory depends, repo's openblas, provides everything that AUR/openblas-lapack does.

There are repo packages and AUR packages that now depend on blas-openblas. This package just conflicts with that but does not have provides for that.

Its maintainer refused to acknowledge that AUR packages only have a right to exist while repo does not offer the same content. So it is kept solely for ego and pride, not for real, actual benefit.

prs commented on 2023-12-10 07:02 (UTC)

This package does follow 'packages having extra features enabled and/or patches in comparison to the official ones. In such an occasion the pkgname should be different to express that difference. ' Therefore I'd rather suggest keeping it. If there's a requirement for name change, 'openblas-lapack-release' or 'openblas-lapack-git' should be good choices.

prs commented on 2023-12-10 03:24 (UTC)

@MarsSeed, this package is not behind the official repo by a single version. You should check the pkgbuild for more details. Removing this will obviously make things harder for us and building this one from github source is not really feasible.

thrasibule commented on 2023-12-10 02:56 (UTC)

I'm relying on this: "Exception to this strict rule may only be packages having extra features enabled and/or patches in comparison to the official ones."

There is no bug here or in the openblas package. It makes a different set of choice of configure parameters. Some people might prefer having dynamic arch, some people don't.

muflone commented on 2023-12-10 01:58 (UTC) (edited on 2023-12-10 01:58 (UTC) by muflone)

Please read the AUR submission rules: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/AUR_submission_guidelines#Rules_of_submission

If this build process could give benefits to others users, please file a bug on the openblas package in order to add this optimizations (if valid) to the repo's package.

thrasibule commented on 2023-12-10 01:56 (UTC)

@muflone, it does have extra features enabled: it uses tls for the memory pool and doesn't do runtime detection of arch. Features that make sense if you care for performance. I don't see how deleting this package benefits the arch users community. It's currently more up to date than the extra package, and nobody forces you to install it.

MarsSeed commented on 2023-12-09 21:00 (UTC)

@prs, the issues you cite are very old and irrelevant to Arch repo's openblas + blas-openblas packages since 14 June 2023.

MarsSeed commented on 2023-12-09 20:49 (UTC)

This package predates extra repo's full openblas-blas-cblas-lapack build by a decade. The latter has only been added on top of the earlier openblas-only package in June 2023.

Therefore this AUR package was absolutely a legitimate build and has been very useful to have. But it is no longer the case.

In fact, repo's openblas provides a wider set of features, like additional subpackages for 64-bit integer support.

muflone commented on 2023-12-09 20:31 (UTC)

@prs in the case there are some issues with the package in the repositories file a bug to the package maintainer.

The presence of some bugs is not a valid reason to create duplicated packages, so if the issue is relevant as it appears from your comment, communicate with the openblas package maintainer to try to fix the package and this way more people will benefit with this fix.

prs commented on 2023-12-09 20:18 (UTC) (edited on 2023-12-09 20:20 (UTC) by prs)

@muflone this package is way different than what you get pre-built from the official repositories. I remember having had some problems while working on some ML project which used Scikit-learn and required some heavy workloads. I would almost always get number of threads exceeded and the program would just crash along with its process be it on terminal or jupyter 1. Went to their GitHub repo to search for this issue and got to know that these errors stem out from using a precompiled version 2. Solutions mentioned here couldn't solve it for me. Then I decided to install this AUR and everything built seemlessly and the problem too went away with it. I suggest keeping a package build that builds according to the cpu specs is a good idea. Compiling from git source for this package is really hard especially the configuration. The AUR package makes building seemless. Removing it would mean a very big setback for heavy ML tasks.

« First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 .. 16 Next › Last »