Re: [cctbxbb] Install OpenBLAS or MKL in base

Yes. gsl it is a no no if you use a BSD license. Pascal On 22/06/18 13:52, [email protected] wrote:

" Licensing

GSL is distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public Licensehttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html (GPL).

The reasons why the GNU Project uses the GPL are described in the following articles:

* Copyleft: Pragmatic Idealismhttps://www.gnu.org/philosophy/pragmatic.html by Richard Stallman * Why you should not use the Lesser GPL for your next libraryhttps://www.gnu.org/licenses/why-not-lgpl.html by Richard Stallman

Additional information for researchers is available in the following article:

* Releasing Free Software if you work at a Universityhttps://www.gnu.org/philosophy/university.html by Richard Stallman

Some answers to common questions about the license:

If I write an application which uses GSL, am I forced to distribute that application? No. The license gives you the option to distribute your application if you want to. You do not have to exercise this option in the license.

If I wanted to distribute an application which uses GSL, what license would I need to use? The GNU General Public License (GPL).

The bottom line for commercial users:

GSL can be used internally ("in-house") without restriction, but only redistributed in other software that is under the GNU GPL."

tricky for our BSD-licensed DIALS / cctbx / etc. & blocker for Phenix (I guess?)

On 22 Jun 2018, at 13:49, [email protected]mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

GSL is a licensing nightmare? Hardcore GNU license?

On 22 Jun 2018, at 13:48, Pascal mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

Is not cblas written in C or it is just an interface to the F77 version?

Otherwise the gsl (gnu scientific library) could be used?

Pascal

On 22/06/18 13:23, Luc Bourhis wrote: Once fable would have been run on it, the FORTRAN would be gone: just commit the C++ and forget the origin of it. But this is terribly unrealistic: this is a vast amount of code to translate and trusting blindly fable would be silly whereas testing it all would be far too much work.

Thus I think the only route for getting the new BLAS 3 smtbx part of nightly tests would be to make the installation of the optimised BLAS not optional.

On 22 Jun 2018, at 14:07, [email protected]mailto:[email protected] mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

Howdy y’all,

If we could avoid adding more FORTRAN source code dependencies to this I (as a fruity computer user) would be delighted :-)

Cheerio Graeme

On 22 Jun 2018, at 13:01, Luc Bourhis mailto:[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

Hi,

On 22 Jun 2018, at 13:27, Pascal mailto:[email protected]mailto:[email protected]> wrote:

A third option would be to keep third party blas/lapack libraries optional but include the version from netlib has a fall back in cctbx. No need to duplicate implementation. If you just include the functions used in cctbx from netlib it is also lightweight. Tests should be fine against netlib only. Third party libraries are checked on their own.

I like the idea. It is very important the new smtbx code relying on BLAS 3 is part of nightly tests but Pascal is right here. The only problem is that netlib reference BLAS is written in FORTRAN. So is LAPACK. Both have C interfaces but the actual implementation is in FORTRAN. We could of course run fable on it. In case you do not know Pascal, fable is a tool written by Ralf to convert Fortran to C++.

Best wishes,

Luc

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected]mailto:[email protected]mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb

-- This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential, copyright and or privileged material, and are for the use of the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee or an authorised recipient of the addressee please notify us of receipt by returning the e-mail and do not use, copy, retain, distribute or disclose the information in or attached to the e-mail. Any opinions expressed within this e-mail are those of the individual and not necessarily of Diamond Light Source Ltd. Diamond Light Source Ltd. cannot guarantee that this e-mail or any attachments are free from viruses and we cannot accept liability for any damage which you may sustain as a result of software viruses which may be transmitted in or with the message. Diamond Light Source Limited (company no. 4375679). Registered in England and Wales with its registered office at Diamond House, Harwell Science and Innovation Campus, Didcot, Oxfordshire, OX11 0DE, United Kingdom

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected]mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected]mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected]mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb

_______________________________________________ cctbxbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/cctbxbb