SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

February 2013

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Matthias Schroeder <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Matthias Schroeder <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 6 Feb 2013 10:15:46 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (28 lines)
On 02/05/2013 06:51 PM, Alan McKay wrote:
> I see LAPACK 3.0 when I do "yum search", but the latest version is 3.4.2
>
> Is there any place to get the newer RPMs for SL 5?
>
> I've looked into building it but the instructions assume a knowledge
> of using the package.  I'm just a lowly Sys Admin and want to build
> this for some scientists I support.

Have these scientists checked whether they really would need a newer 
version? I know that many people always want the newest version around, 
but in fact this is rarely justified. 
http://www.netlib.org/lapack/improvement.html has a list of changes in 
lapack. I think before you embark on rebuilding the latest lapack the 
scientists you have in mind just verify that they rely on any of the 
improvements listed. And if they can not point out which of the 
improvements have a direct impact on their work but just mumble 'just to 
be sure' or 'in general much better', I would not try to rebuild the 
stuff. A non-optimal rebuild might do more harm than good.

Matthias

>
> thanks,
> -Alan
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2