From edd at debian.org  Thu Jul  3 14:40:39 2008
From: edd at debian.org (Dirk Eddelbuettel)
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:40:39 -0500
Subject: [Rd] --enable-BLAS-shlib conflict with
	--with-lapack	in	configure?
In-Reply-To: <486CC12B.9030404@biostat.ku.dk>
References: <s3s7ic3l4y5.fsf@slagelg.uio.no>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031043320.11148@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
	<s3sod5fjj1b.fsf@slagelg.uio.no> <486CC12B.9030404@biostat.ku.dk>
Message-ID: <18540.51399.717375.219644@ron.nulle.part>


On 3 July 2008 at 14:08, Peter Dalgaard wrote:
| As for the subject matter, you _can_ actually create such at thing as an
| optimized, shared BLAS/Lapack, and it is probably faster than an
| unoptimized, shared one (well, at least you could create them when I
| played with this some years ago). It's just that people think it is a
| bit silly, so they are not doing it for you, and as I recall it, you

Debian has provided optimised Atlas libraries, compiled as shared libraries,
for over eight years. So not everybody sees this as 'silly'. We set up our R
builds to transparently use them.  That way you'd get tuned linear algebra as
a plug-in -- and the plugin is made possible because of the shared-library
build.

So not everybody agrees with BDR's resolute statement implying static-only
builds if one is concerned about performance.  Performance is almost always
relative, and often relative to several possibly conflicting baselines.

Dirk

-- 
Three out of two people have difficulties with fractions.



[Rd] --enable-BLAS-shlib conflict with --with-lapack in configure?
Dirk Eddelbuettel