lapack 3.0
Gerrit P. Haase
gerrit@familiehaase.de
Wed Jun 29 22:09:00 GMT 2005
James R. Phillips wrote:
> --- Christopher Faylor wrote:
>
>>FWIW, I don't think we want to start a precedent of official cygwin releases
>>installing things in /usr/local.
>>
>
>
> The intent of the packaging design is that the official cygwin binary release
> would _not_ install anything in /usr/local. However, with installation of the
> source package, it would be possible to build the locally optimized atlas
> libraries. These would be compiled from source and installed by a local
> administrator. That being the case, the preferred location would be
> /usr/local, per fhs guidelines.
>
> The binary release, as initially designed, would install link libraries in
> /usr/lib and dlls in /usr/bin. However, locating the dlls in /usr/bin is
> problematic, because they become impossible to override with path manipulations
> for binaries living in /usr/bin. So this part of the design needs to be
> revised. After thinking about it, I don't think use of the /opt tree makes
> that much sense; probably the easiest modification is to create a
> /usr/bin/lapack subdirectory for the nonoptimized libraries to live in, and add
> it to the back of the path in an init.d script. This is what I am leaning towards.
No subdirectories below /usr/bin, please.
To be honest, I cannot follow the discussion. Why is it not possible to
put the DLLs into /usr/bin? Is there another official package which
includes the same libraries?
Gerrit
--
=^..^=
More information about the Cygwin-apps
mailing list