LAPACK_xxx is the universal way to go for lapack >= 3.40 with c/c++ i…#21291
LAPACK_xxx is the universal way to go for lapack >= 3.40 with c/c++ i…#21291dwardor wants to merge 3 commits intoopencv:4.xfrom dwardor:alternate
Conversation
|
OpenCV LAPACK`'s support is wider that just lapack integration.
Tested on ArchLinux with fresh CMake: Failed on linking step for opencv_test_core: Need to investigate (probably it is a different problem). |
I haven't touched anything "cblas" so yes I'd say those undefined references are another issue... How does Apple's "Accelerate" (or other lapack implementations) define the lapack functions in the appropriate ".h" files ? LAPACK_xxxx or xxxx_ or ???? |
|
CMakeError log has this: |
… using netlib's reference LAPACK implementation version >= 3.4.0
Can you test with the lattest patch I just pushed ? |
|
OK so Mac build fails... suggesting Accelerate implementation does not use LAPACK_xxxx preprocessor macros as does the reference implementation... |
…nterface.
This is an alternate solution to #21116 (explained by #21114 (comment))
It works on my gentoo box... doing a pull request to test it here on th ebuildbot. If it works it seems better/cleaner than #21114 to me as it uses lapack's "unpreprocessed" function names and relies on lapack's preprocessor macros to do all the magic...
Pull Request Readiness Checklist
See details at https://github.com/opencv/opencv/wiki/How_to_contribute#making-a-good-pull-request
Patch to opencv_extra has the same branch name.