[Haskell-cafe] Re: ANNOUNCE: A Levenberg-Marquardt implementation

[Xiao-Yong Jin]

Maurí­cio CA <mauricio.antunes at gmail.com> writes:

>>> Yes. It works this way. Tested in debian and old fedora
>
>> Thank you for testing. I have just released bindings-levmar-0.1.0.1 on
>> hackage. It simply replaces pkgconfig-depends with extra-libraries. I
>> hope this solves the installation problems.
>
> Debian maintainer was willing to add pkg-config to lapack package:
>
> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-scicomp-devel/2009-September/004508.html
>
> However, he and also Tollef (pkg-config maintainer) believe it's a
> better idea to add it to upstream package:
>
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.package-management.pkg-config/346
>
> Unless you think that extra-libraries is a good long term
> solution, I'll still investigate on how to add pkg-config
> generation to configuration scripts and try to send a sugestion
> with a patch to maintainers of libraries wrapped in bindings-*.
> Although I don't know exactly how that patch should exactly be...
>

It is not practical to use pkg-config for such libraries.
After you persuade the reference code[1] of lapack to use
pkg-config, are you going to make ATLAS[2] do it also?  And
what about Intel's mkl[3]?  Or even lapack bindings provided
by Nvidia's CUDA[4]?

[1] http://www.netlib.org/lapack/
[2] http://math-atlas.sourceforge.net/
[3] http://software.intel.com/en-us/intel-mkl/
[4] http://www.nvidia.com/object/cuda_home.html

One can install them side by side, but for performance's
sake, one really wants to link a particular library/binary
to the most useful one.

I know it's hard to include every possibilities.  But I
prefer some configuration switch that I can tune when
building the library.

That's been said, it is still your package.  And people can
always change the build scripts for their own needs.

Best,
Xiao-Yong
-- 
    c/*    __o/*
    <\     * (__
    */\      <