From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Feb  2 10:47:08 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DADEB1065670
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Wed,  2 Feb 2011 10:47:08 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from annulen@yandex.ru)
Received: from forward20.mail.yandex.net (forward20.mail.yandex.net
	[95.108.253.145])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8CCE18FC14
	for <freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>; Wed,  2 Feb 2011 10:47:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from web20.yandex.ru (web20.yandex.ru [95.108.253.229])
	by forward20.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id C9A6A5D10712;
	Wed,  2 Feb 2011 13:31:51 +0300 (MSK)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail;
	t=1296642711; bh=Ab5DW100jS6olphyd9+Y0zoB3MyqP9WZ10+69LXyW1g=;
	h=From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject:MIME-Version:Message-Id:
	Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type;
	b=QX4pFXVdWjAxCqjYNGHp5tm7/NlPP5AvrDPZrgiLyB8HrS5z3yVB8DyThZQFuz9N5
	ZkPDeIHMRme9Mrm97Tg4/pb/rU3JesPQUZyoyX2+3WOp7B08QbjGHfR3mcisYN+qAL
	8ucSKp1yLYE+1SEcti3UDzi4vp+BO7ggZ2XmMldI=
Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by web20.yandex.ru (Yandex) with ESMTP id C13CE61884EF;
	Wed,  2 Feb 2011 13:31:51 +0300 (MSK)
Received: from [195.34.30.225] ([195.34.30.225]) by mail.yandex.ru with HTTP; 
	Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:31:50 +0300
From: Konstantin Tokarev <annulen@yandex.ru>
To: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20110202102816.GA58343@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
References: <20110202102816.GA58343@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <335051296642710@web20.yandex.ru>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 13:31:50 +0300
X-Mailer: Yamail [ http://yandex.ru ] 5.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r
Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: policy on having the same routines in different library
	archives?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD <freebsd-ports.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-ports@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports>,
	<mailto:freebsd-ports-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 10:47:08 -0000



02.02.2011, 13:28, "Anton Shterenlikht" <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>:
> I've put a port of Slatec together:
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/151970
>
> Recently I realised that some 110 routines in Slatec
> are already present in math/blas, and the Blas versions
> seem to be newer.
>
> % ar -t /usr/local/lib/libblas.a | sort > blas.sorted
> % ar -t /usr/local/lib/libslatec.a | sort > slatec.sorted
> % comm -12 blas.sorted slatec.sorted | wc
> ššššš110 šššš110 šššš882
> %
>
> I can see benefits and disadvantages of having same
> routines in different libraries. Advantages are
> that a user can choose to only install Slatec,
> with no Blas, and that no fine tuning of the
> distribution is required.
> Disadvantages could be extra size and potential
> for confusion, e.g. when linking against both
> libraries.
>
> Is there a FreeBSD ports policy on this?

FYI: there are lots of BLAS implementations in the world, all of them having the same API.
The same for LAPACK.

-- 
Regards,
Konstantin