Re: Is it possible atlas is linked wrongly by new binutils?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 11:21:30AM +0200, Jakub Martisko wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9.8.2017 11:37, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> > 
> > ocaml-gsl (OCaml bindings for GNU Scientific Library) currently
> > fails to link to atlas:
> > 
> > + /usr/bin/ocamlfind ocamlopt -g -I lib -linkpkg -package bigarray -I lib -I examples lib/gsl.cmxa examples/blas_ex.cmx -o examples/blas_ex.native
> > /usr/lib64/atlas/libsatlas.so: undefined reference to `dlarfy_'
> > /usr/lib64/atlas/libsatlas.so: undefined reference to `slarfy_'
> > /usr/lib64/atlas/libsatlas.so: undefined reference to `clarfy_'
> > /usr/lib64/atlas/libsatlas.so: undefined reference to `zlarfy_'
> > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> > 
> > However this only happens with the very latest atlas that was built by
> > binutils 2.29 (atlas-3.10.2-18.fc27.x86_64).  It doesn't occur with
> > the previous version of atlas (atlas-3.10.2-16.fc26) even though there
> > seems to have been no change in atlas.
> > 
> > $ nm -D /usr/lib64/atlas/libtatlas.so | grep larfy
> >                  U clarfy_
> >                  U dlarfy_
> >                  U slarfy_
> >                  U zlarfy_
> > 
> > I looked in /usr/lib64 on my development machine which has atlas
> > installed but there is no .so* file that I can find which defines
> > these symbols.  I also couldn't work out where in the atlas code
> > (which is a bit strange) these references are used.
> > 
> > Hence the question: Is this breakage in atlas?  binutils?
> > 
> > Rich.
> > 
> 
> OK so it seems that according to git commit messages LAPACK
> has been rebased from 3.6.0 to 3.7.1 day before that mass
> rebuild [1][2]. Those "larfy" subroutines have been added to
> LAPACK in 3.7.0 and have not been present before[3]. I've
> tried to make a scratch build of atlas [4] and the missing
> symbols seem to be present...
> 
> $ nm -D ./libtatlas.so.3|grep larfy
> 
> T clarfy_
> T dlarfy_
> T slarfy_
> T zlarfy_

It looks as if you scratch build just changes ‘rm’ to ‘rm -f’ at one
point in the spec file.  Is that change also needed?

I can do a bump and rebuild of atlas with or without that change - let
me know.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines.  Tiny program with many
powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc.
http://people.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux