https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1357724 --- Comment #15 from Dave Love <d.love@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Susi Lehtola from comment #14) > Yeah, so the default ATLAS package on x86_64 is non-SSE3, but there's a SSE3 > variant available, as well. Yes, and it's the ld.so.conf mechanism I think is relevant. > Packaging both within the same srpm is not allowed per the packaging > guidelines, as there needs to be a spec per tarball. I don't see where it says that, though you can only have one URL. > I believe the ABIs are shared, though. Apologies, I was confusing libcint and libint, which already has two versions. [If they're from the same place, I'd have thought it would be more of an argument for bundling source with libcint, but I'm not reviewing it.] Obviously I should stick to pointing out the way hardware-specific versions have been handled. That's relevant for those of us who have to support such things. The way ATLAS does it at least can support heterogeneous HPC systems using a single image on stateless nodes, where the image system can make node-dependent mods to the configuration files. [Not that you should use ATLAS on x86, given OpenBLAS, and you could perhaps handle that HPC case differently.] -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx