* Sébastien Villemot <sebast...@debian.org> [2022-12-16 16:26]:
In the current system, in which the BLAS and LAPACK implementation are decided through the alternatives system, it’s not possible to solve the problem through versioned provides. Because even if the dependency on the versioned provides is satisfied, this does not prevent another flavour of LAPACK (not satisfying the dependency) to be installed and selected through the alternatives system.
I think those alternatives names would need to be per ABI version (of the virtual package) anyhow.
So indeed the only clean way of solving this issue seems to forbid coinstallability of several BLAS or LAPACK flavours. But the latter is considered as a feature, not as a bug. I agree that using the alternatives system for a shared library is a bit ugly and does not play well with our tooling, but that’s a choice that was made long ago and it also brings some flexibility for the user (it’s easy to switch from one implementation to the other).
Is ease of switching the only reason for using the alternatives system here?
Maybe we should rethink this decision as it really does not play well with our tooling and you could just as well use apt to switch the implementation.
Cheers Jochen
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
