On 2026-06-16 12:16, Konstantinos Poulios wrote:
Going beyond this specific bug, the main issue is that BLAS has an
ambiguous API/ABI. What I am pointing out is that AFAIK
update-alternatives cannot deal with such ambiguities. Right?
Not exactly. The alternatives are for each architecture,
so if they are consistent within each, then there is no conflict.
That is, s390x might be different from other architectures,
but so long as openblas, blis etc are using the same interface as
reference BLAS,
there should be no problem.
At least for mkl, it leads to errors as reported in
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1067732 , but based
on the confb.cpp test results shown by Drew, I would not be surprised
if there are more undiscovered bugs related to complex number blas.
This is indeed a serious conflict, if intel-mkl is handling the
interface differently
from the other implementations. The bug is rightly placed with the
intel-mkl package.
A great pity if intel-mkl is necessarily incompatible; I had thought the
BLAS ABI had been
standardised sufficiently to avoid that.
