Ashigabou Repository atlas vs yum blas/lapack
Hello: I'm hoping someone can straighten me out. I have a 64 bit fedora 8 quad core machine and can install blas and lapack from the yum repository. With these, numpy installs fine and finds blas and lapack. I also tried removing the yum blas/lapack libs and installing atlas via the instructions given on the scipy site for Ashigabou Repository. Atlas built fine from source and after installing the new rpm there were two files in the lib64/atlas/sse2 folder: libblas.so.3.0 and liblapack.so.3.0. However, when I try to install numpy, it cannot find any blas, lapack, or atlas, even though my site.cfg file has: [DEFAULT] library_dirs = /usr/lib64:/usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 [blas_opt] libraries = f77blas, cblas, atlas [lapack_opt] libraries = lapack, f77blas, cblas, atlas [atlas] library_dirs = /usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 atlas_libs = lapack, blas Using LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 before installing numpy does not make a difference. My questions are, are the yum versions of lapack/blas just as good as the one built from Ashigabou source, and if not, why would numpy not be able to find the Ashigabou blas and lapack files (even though its looking in the right directory)? Thanks.
jb wrote:
I also tried removing the yum blas/lapack libs and installing atlas via the instructions given on the scipy site for Ashigabou Repository.
Did you install blas/lapack from ashigabou repository as well ? When I developed those packages, FC packages for blas/lapack were unusable. But maybe with recent versions it is ok. I don't have very much time to spend on this unfortunately (I called for people using fedora to take care of this and pushing it to official FC repositories as I am not using FC myself, but nothing happened).
Atlas built fine from source and after installing the new rpm there were two files in the lib64/atlas/sse2 folder: libblas.so.3.0 and liblapack.so.3.0. However, when I try to install numpy, it cannot find any blas, lapack, or atlas, even though my site.cfg file has:
[DEFAULT] library_dirs = /usr/lib64:/usr/lib64/atlas/sse2
[blas_opt] libraries = f77blas, cblas, atlas
[lapack_opt] libraries = lapack, f77blas, cblas, atlas
[atlas] library_dirs = /usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 atlas_libs = lapack, blas
Could you paste the configuration log (when it says whether it finds the packages or not). I believe that you put too much information, the following site.cfg should work: [DEFAULT] library_dirs = /usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 Should work, but I can't be sure without seeing the log (Installing in sse2 is strange BTW; a quadcore certainly means you have more than sse2. That's something else to fix).
Using LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/lib64/atlas/sse2 before installing numpy does not make a difference.
LD_LIBRARY_PATH does not change how numpy looks for libraries. It only changes how the OS looks for libraries when you launch programs, so this is expected.
My questions are, are the yum versions of lapack/blas just as good as the one built from Ashigabou source, and if not, why would numpy not be able to find the Ashigabou blas and lapack files (even though its looking in the right directory)?
In the old times (FC 5), the yum ones did not work. If they do now, I would say just use them. ATLAS is faster than blas/lapack, but it is more work, and it is useful mainly for large problems anyway. cheers, David
participants (2)
-
David Cournapeau -
jb