On Jun 29 22:40, James R. Phillips wrote: > --- Charles Wilson wrote: > > FWIW, I think the /opt tree is PRECISELY the right thing to do with > > regards to the un-optimized lapack DLLs. With PATH manipulations, > > binaries like octave.exe can find the "appropriate" lapack DLLs -- > > unoptimized if /opt/lapack/bin is the only dir in PATH containing them; > > optimized if the local administrator installs optimized versions > > somewhere (/usr/local/bin?) and takes affirmative steps to ensure that > > /usr/local/bin precedes /opt/lapack/bin in $PATH. > > Are there any other official packages that install to /opt? I don't have an > /opt at all in my cygwin directory tree. I am reluctant to create a new > top-level directory just for part of one package. > > Not that this couldn't work. What were down to is just a preference. > Somewhere in opt would work; so would /usr/lib/lapack.
I'd opt for /opt (sorry for the pun). Bigger and more complex packages are better served by getting their own /opt subdir in the long run. Charles is asking for /opt for a while now anyway. Perhaps the lapack package would be a good start. Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Project Co-Leader mailto:[email protected] Red Hat, Inc.
