Bugzilla Bug 162667

I'm getting digest errors on lapack.tgz, causing both
lapack-atlas and lapack-reference to fail.  Moreover,
lapack-20020531-20021004.patch.bz2 now fails to apply.

Is there any reason we don't keep a versioned tarball on
our mirrors?

Created an attachment (id=107380) [edit]
patch failure log

Adding the patch failure log.

Probably nobody's gotten around to it. Want to make the change?

I would, but doing it right really requires generating a new patch, which is
going to take more time than I have right now.

(In reply to comment #3)
> I would, but doing it right really requires generating a new patch, which is
> going to take more time than I have right now.

Nah, just take the old tarball, version it and upload it, then change the
SRC_URIs as needed. We'll need a revbump for the new lapack + new patch.

The new lapack has been on my to-do list for a long time now. Maybe
I get to it this weekend. Unfortunately, I am currently hunting for a new
apartment so I suspect I'll be somewhat short on time.

Markus

(In reply to comment #4)
> Nah, just take the old tarball, version it and upload it, then change the
> SRC_URIs as needed. We'll need a revbump for the new lapack + new patch.

Ah, I had discarded that option because I don't happen to have an old tarball.
Do you have one, per chance?

The one on the mirrors should still be the old one unless someone has
secretly bumped the ebuild ;)

cheers,
Markus

Upstream has renamed lapack.tgz to lapack-3.0.tgz to accommodate their
most recent lapack-3.1 release; otherwise the tarballs are identical.
I've changed all lapack-reference and lapack-atlas ebuilds accordingly
and also pushed a lapack-3.0.tgz tarball out to the mirrors.

In doing so I noticed that we need to stabilize lapack-reference-3.0-r4 since
the current stable lapack-reference ebuild doesn't work with gfortran.

Best,
Markus