Status of octave on Fedora

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Status of octave on Fedora

Quentin Spencer
There has been recent discussion on this list about installing octave
and related packages on Fedora, so I thought I would post an update.
Dmitri Sergatskov has been kind enough to make some space available on
his FTP server for the RPMS I have created:
ftp://coffee.phys.unm.edu/pub/octave
This set includes version 2.1.67 of octave, octave-forge, and some
additional dependencies to include the extra bells and whistles, as well
as non-broken versions of blas and lapack (don't use the ones that come
with Fedora Core 3). Missing are HDF5 and ATLAS. I intend to try
packaging these eventually. Also not present in these RPMS (but
required) is qhull, because it is now in Fedora Extras and can be
obtained at
http://download.fedora.redhat.com/pub/fedora/linux/extras/3/i386/qhull-2003.1-2.i386.rpm

These were built on Fedora Core 3, but I have heard that Fedora Core 3
and 2 are binary compatible, so they may work on release 2 as well. For
older versions such as FC1 or Red Hat 9, I would suggest downloading the
SRPMS and building with the command:
rpmbuild --rebuild <SRPM file>

As for the future of octave on Fedora, it appears that I have finally
cleared the beaurocratic obstacles to becoming the official Fedora
Extras maintainer of octave and related packages. Octave, blas and
lapack were removed from the first test release of Fedora Core 4, and I
think it will stay that way. The updating programs (yum, up2date) will
be enabled by default to install from Fedora Extras in Fedora Core 4, so
by the time the final version is released, it should be possible to
install everything with one command (yum install octave-forge), similar
to Debian. Some packages from Fedora Extras are still being maintained
in Red Hat Enterprise Linux, but I don't know whether that will include
octave.

I have been building these packages for my own use for a long time, so
this project should be manageable, but if anyone is interested in
helping (especially with figuring out how to package ATLAS), please let
me know.

regards,
Quentin



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of octave on Fedora

E. Joshua Rigler
On Sat, 2005-03-19 at 10:11, Quentin Spencer wrote:
<snip>
> This set includes version 2.1.67 of octave, octave-forge, and some
> additional dependencies to include the extra bells and whistles, as well
> as non-broken versions of blas and lapack (don't use the ones that come
> with Fedora Core 3).
<snip>

This is all great!  

I will probably continue to compile my own stuff for my 2-CPU Opteron
system (to get optimized multi-threaded BLAS libraries) however, so I am
curious about the "non-broken" versions of blas and lapack you provide.
Can you summarize what fixes have been applied, or point to relevant
discussions on this or other lists?  I actually compile these on my own
too, and have long tolerated a few failed "make check" results that I
believe are related to problems with these libraries.  It would be nice
to finally fix this minor problem as I upgrade from 2.1.64 to 2.1.67.

Thanks.

-EJR



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of octave on Fedora

Quentin Spencer
E. Joshua Rigler wrote:

>I am curious about the "non-broken" versions of blas and lapack you provide.
>Can you summarize what fixes have been applied, or point to relevant
>discussions on this or other lists?
>
The main problem with these libraries as included with Fedora Core 3 was
that some optimizations in GCC (version 3.4.2) caused them to not work
at all. The fix is a change in compiler flags. The RPMs at Dmitri's ftp
server are ones he put there from RHEL, but other updated versions are
available from the "development" tree of the Fedora download server.
There have been several threads on this and the other octave lists in
the last few months, usually regarding some linear algebra function
(eig, svd, etc.) going into an infinite loop and not returning, all of
which have been caused by this problem. For more specific information,
see the recent bugs filed on RedHat's bugzilla related to lapack (there
are at least 2-3 of them IIRC). Compiling blas and lapack on Fedora Core
4 should be interesting because GCC 4 is the default compiler--I haven't
tried it yet.

-Quentin



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of octave on Fedora

Dmitri A. Sergatskov
In reply to this post by E. Joshua Rigler
E. Joshua Rigler wrote:
...

> Can you summarize what fixes have been applied, or point to relevant
> discussions on this or other lists?  I actually compile these on my own
> too, and have long tolerated a few failed "make check" results that I
> believe are related to problems with these libraries.  It would be nice
> to finally fix this minor problem as I upgrade from 2.1.64 to 2.1.67.
>

The RedHat's fix is to compile few files in lapack/blas with reduced
optimization. This is the relevant snippet from lapack.spec:

...

cd SRC
# Some files don't like -O2, but -Os is fine
RPM_OPT_SIZE_FLAGS=$(echo $RPM_OPT_FLAGS | sed 's|-O2|-Os|')
FFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_SIZE_FLAGS" make dlamch.o slamch.o
FFLAGS="$RPM_OPT_FLAGS" make static

...

For lapack that I am using myself, I recompiled the
files

dcabs1
dlamch
slamch
dgeev

with "-ffloat-store" added to FFLAGS.

Some people do not like "-ffloat-store", so
I put up the official RedHat RPMs instead of mine.
(I am also not sure that dcabs1 and dgeev do require
the fix.)

Since it is not clear if this is a compiler problem or lapack problem,
I will leave it to jwe to decide if octave (which includes some of
the lapack sources) should include this workaround in it.


> Thanks.
>
> -EJR
>

Regards,

Dmitri
--



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Status of octave on Fedora

Dmitri A. Sergatskov
In reply to this post by Quentin Spencer
Quentin Spencer wrote:

> at all. The fix is a change in compiler flags. The RPMs at Dmitri's ftp
> server are ones he put there from RHEL, but other updated versions are

I hear that RHEL's lapack package still has some problems, so I put out mine
as well (lapack-3.0-28.das.src.rpm, blas-3.0-28.das.i386.rpm,
lapack-3.0-28.das.i386.rpm)

>
> -Quentin
>

Dmitri.
--



-------------------------------------------------------------
Octave is freely available under the terms of the GNU GPL.

Octave's home on the web:  http://www.octave.org
How to fund new projects:  http://www.octave.org/funding.html
Subscription information:  http://www.octave.org/archive.html
-------------------------------------------------------------