On Thu, 2025-09-11 at 14:18 -0500, Matthias Maier wrote: > > TL;DR: I'm proposing removing eselect-blas/lapack and the virtuals, > > and using sci-libs/flexiblas instead. > > Yes, please! > > > > Another potential concern is that FlexiBLAS seems to be largely > > university-developed software, with a single maintainer, no public bug > > tracker and a semi-public code repository (it seems that only releases > > are pushed there rather than all changes). The author seems quite > > friendly, and addressed issues I've reported so far, but the risk is > > there. However, we're not alone here: Fedora has switched to FlexiBLAS > > already. > > On the other hand, BLAS/Lapack is a *very* slowly evolving standard. It > would also be feasible to consider picking up maintenance of FlexiBLAS > if the need arises. > > > We could wait for support for LP64 / ILP64 in FlexiBLAS before > switching. Or just switch and let ILP64 hang in the air for a bit.
Given that we don't really support ILP64 now (it's semi-accidental at best), I suppose no harm in doing it now. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
