Bug 206931 – dev-python/numeric and dev-python/numpy both install lapack_lite (and fftpack_lite)

• Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
• Product: Gentoo Linux

[Description Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2008-01-21 21:29:12 UTC]

flame@enterprise linalg % qlist numeric numpy | grep lapack
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/lapack_lite.so.debug
/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/lapack_lite.so
/usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/linalg/lapack_lite.so.debug
/usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/linalg/lapack_lite.so


Doesn't sound like a good idea to me...

[Comment 1 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2008-01-22 12:47:17 UTC]

Symbol rfftb1@@ (64-bit UNIX System V ABI AMD x86-64 architecture) present 2 times
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/FFT/fftpack.so
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/fft/fftpack_lite.so
Symbol rfftb@@ (64-bit UNIX System V ABI AMD x86-64 architecture) present 2 times
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/FFT/fftpack.so
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/fft/fftpack_lite.so
Symbol rfftf@@ (64-bit UNIX System V ABI AMD x86-64 architecture) present 2 times
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/FFT/fftpack.so
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/fft/fftpack_lite.so
Symbol rffti@@ (64-bit UNIX System V ABI AMD x86-64 architecture) present 2 times
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/Numeric/FFT/fftpack.so
  /usr/lib64/python2.5/site-packages/numpy/fft/fftpack_lite.so

[Comment 2 Ryan May 2008-01-22 17:12:56 UTC]

Not all that surprising, since numpy is really just the next version of Numeric.  Really, Numeric has been sunsetted, and all programs that depend on Numeric need to be ported to numpy.  Going forward, you really shouldn't see both installed.

[Comment 3 Sébastien Fabbro (RETIRED) 2008-01-24 10:27:30 UTC]

Hi Diego

I am not sure it would have any consequence though. There is little reason to import both numpy and Numeric modules simultaneously.
Also packages depending on Numeric are slowly moving to numpy.
Did you encounter any package that suffer from this name duplication?

[Comment 4 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) 2008-01-24 10:42:23 UTC]

Nope, I admit I don't know enough of python to assess how much this can be a problem... any hope to get the old one out soon?

[Comment 5 Martin Mokrejš 2008-06-11 08:59:24 UTC]

(In reply to comment #4)
> Nope, I admit I don't know enough of python to assess how much this can be a
> problem... any hope to get the old one out soon?
> 

See bug #181653

[Comment 6 Sébastien Fabbro (RETIRED) 2008-07-08 10:28:28 UTC]

Closing this one, since we won't do anything about it.