From b.h.mevik at usit.uio.no  Thu Jul  3 13:37:04 2008
From: b.h.mevik at usit.uio.no (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn-Helge?= Mevik)
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2008 13:37:04 +0200
Subject: [Rd] --enable-BLAS-shlib conflict with --with-lapack in
	configure?
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031043320.11148@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
	(Brian Ripley's message of "Thu, 3 Jul 2008 10:52:35 +0100 (BST)")
References: <s3s7ic3l4y5.fsf@slagelg.uio.no>
	<alpine.LFD.1.10.0807031043320.11148@gannet.stats.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <s3sod5fjj1b.fsf@slagelg.uio.no>

Prof Brian Ripley <ripley at stats.ox.ac.uk> writes:

> This is intentional.

Ok.

> Please note what the R-admin manual says about
> --with-lapack, including 'definitely *not* recommended'

Oh.  I have always understood that as referring to --with-lapack, not
--with-lapack="-L/something...".

> If you are concerned about performance you definitely do not want to use
> shared R, not a shared BLAS.

I'm sorry, I don't quite follow you here.  Do you mean not create a shared R
and not create a shared BLAS, or was there a "not" too many?

-- 
Bj?rn-Helge Mevik



[Rd] --enable-BLAS-shlib conflict with --with-lapack in configure?
=?iso-8859-1?Q?Bj=F8rn-Helge?= Mevik