On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 03:59:42PM +0530, Kumar Appaiah wrote: > On 02/07/07, Neil Williams wrote: [snip] > >It only seems to increase the risk of mysterious bugs if you are using > >two different fortran libraries that are built against *VERY* different > >compilers : gcc-3.4 and gcc-4.2. Having one package depend on both > >libgfortran2 and libg2c0 could be a source of weird bugs. As maintainer > >of libitpp, it will be your job to fix them! (in conjunction with > >libitpp upstream). GnuCash has had similar problems - even now it still > >depends on libglib1 because of a dependency on an old library that has > >not been updated. (The bug report is over a year old now.) These things > >tend to bite eventually because the old library has to be removed from > >Debian at some point. > > Would you advise me to retain the lapack dependency and stay with > refblas, or add the gsl dependency? Also, I am not clear how to avoid > the lapack dependency, which forces me to depend on an old compiler. > > >lapack would appear to be less of a potential headache than atlas and > >the way that the libraries are arranged means that atlas is still a > >usable alternative when installing the binaries. It is just worth > >being aware that lapack may complicate things when trying to fix bugs > >in libitpp. > > Well, since I have to depend lapack for features, I am unable to > figure out a way to avoid the old gcc depends (through libg2c0).
You might be interested to learn of the proposed release goal for lenny of removing g77/gcc-3.4 in favor of gfortran. Read all about it at: http://lists.debian.org/debian-toolchain/2007/07/msg00000.html --Joe PS - I know nothing about fortran, just happened to read this thread and then read the about the transition on -release :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
