Repository navigation
Consider retiring LAPACK capabilities check #481
Description
Activity
- added a parent issue
on Sep 3, 2025 @barracuda156 Can you advise what it looks like on your (somewhat non-standard / more exotic) macPorts system?
@barracuda156 Just in case, and while I do not think you need, there is now a branch for this:
https://github.com/RcppCore/RcppArmadillo/tree/feature/simpler_lapack_setup
@eddelbuettel Thank you!
Can you advise what it looks like on your (somewhat non-standard / more exotic) macPorts system?
Could you specify, what to check (which header)?
P. S. I will look into rebuilding R with external LAPACK, provided Reference-LAPACK/lapack#1105 get resolved, which I gonna try now.
@barracuda156 In issue ticket #4001 over at
mlpackyou wrote in this comment thatOn a side note, what is the advised usage of LAPACK now? mlpack build spits out a lot of option ARMA_CRIPPLED_LAPACK is not supported messages now. Looks like that comes from RcppArmadillo.
If you try the branch I pointed to (or simply 'by hand' comment-out the first part in the config file
RcppArmadilloConfigGenerated.h.in(ie this file) and/or of course the created fileRcppArmadilloConfigGenerated.h) the warnings should go away.In other words I just want you to check whether on your normal, current, working system the warnings go away. I am not asking you to change your configuration, rather I am looking for active confirmation that
libRlapack.*is now good enough. Makes sense?Reacted by Sergey FedorovI will try and let you know.
Sounds good. Forgot to add of course that both the warnings should go away yet all your functionality should remain as is. The warning really is just noise as best as I can tell.
@eddelbuettel I think build from 7124af9 works fine. I do not get an error about missing
armadilloheader and no more warnings about “crippled LAPACK” when buildingmlpack.Reacted by Dirk EddelbuettelThank you for testing and confirming. Those changes should make it to CRAN 'due course', likely early next week.
Reacted by Sergey Fedorov
Recent R versions (IIRC R 4.5.0 or later) have / should have a feature-complete LAPACK even when building with the internal Rlapack. If memory serves, it is even planned to move away from internal LAPACK. So the check we have in
configure.acnamelymay be too harsh. I don't think I have a system to test this on: all mine use system lapack as do the cloud instances I have access to.
So in short maybe removing
and its use in the generated header
is appropriate now?