X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature:	a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=X7DYf7pH3vK2uxnj
	syAUyuERJcYsxwLyWtnp/o/plHCAGpgqR3fwk5D9cvRUtsPI1zlEpXtWSYZYaZ+u
	56GTHV8589C0v7p8oGFI0XNZhkofZOL6qjaxm2VMR/9pbZAp01Ac2ViUobAnVoMk
	v58ahHwGZBk/XdSLHyODSAfCavM=
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
	:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type
	:content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=z36DDcMooYWNC3u9RJvKsa
	u6JxA=; b=Byat0SQWerY/EGmbIhBStDC7sWKKpscn+5D331ju6Ukr0xP7Nz0h1c
	MfM5kH+UhAtVP7q+OQsu0h2Rs1rZnqOQJ9RoWIh8okump7h4wXvrGTykXdMKLRUq
	qHde2vTkaI3U0WeMfXeAEYllGTNzotyyCiFnjnqmsPm/YWSIqwvSM=
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results:	sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found:	No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status:	No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=H*i:sk:76251bb, H*MI:sk:76251bb, H*f:sk:76251bb
X-HELO:	mail-io0-f173.google.com
X-Google-DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PWZe3HL8zxuDXa4z93VEeJs29ri7TOh4V6VFcIJPYSs=; b=Mt8lBsucdTWx56ZNs0yU76V1O6EppKAAWm8AyGJl5H1aMAeEpNycljMbv3hfUycmdD JZ8upOpv07rPfGxmUUTliJtXT4JkbaQt+vLfRFF08afIy6CQFI8wbMl49dBktvdjeGLz 50ERovRMSRNpAfTt8jzRf35hR2BPM8XKLhpYZdVGiEWB1az8JnJAbx6ji0NXi7zPzuSh 0nNB9ti9+9386kgekwVUFKP9NeKBeLi0+4PNmOgdr9BvpO1xUuMvqkop/2JTgLrpvijz aAiCgSU5ab5OOV1fArYuIjgiXpVSMeHKA4G4YpqKSEVoY4QGmNVwTXGQo4Ia1ryVjCy4 S7xw==
X-Gm-Message-State:	AFeK/H0JFDjsgKlx1ZzXbz9U0+uW5ADJnmvZdMN9PX/NPOgx0FY7vEKiZuNbwvdWE/1aBA==
X-Received:	by 10.107.6.66 with SMTP id 63mr21428723iog.6.1491309826126; Tue, 04 Apr 2017 05:43:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:	Re: 64bit lapack-3.7.0-1.tar.xz - Empty
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<aefa5249-51e8-c320-7614-8354b8890da1 AT gmail DOT com> <7e8b44e4-78e9-f9a8-63c1-0979bcecbb87 AT gmail DOT com> <2b672a97-dc43-492f-48d0-c1fabdb7d56c AT gmail DOT com> <76251bb5-9303-6456-11b4-755032891880 AT gmail DOT com>
From:	cyg Simple <cygsimple AT gmail DOT com>
Message-ID:	<4e5dde61-633a-a8c1-d143-affb537f1e0c@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 4 Apr 2017 08:43:31 -0400
User-Agent:	Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<76251bb5-9303-6456-11b4-755032891880@gmail.com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes

On 4/3/2017 11:44 AM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
> On 03/04/2017 17:07, cyg Simple wrote:
>> On 4/3/2017 11:00 AM, Marco Atzeri wrote:
>>> On 03/04/2017 16:53, cyg Simple wrote:
>>>> The file is lapack-3.7.0-1.tar.xz 32 bytes with no contents.  I've
>>>> tried
>>>> two different mirrors.  There are also no dependencies applied.
>>>>
>>>> Reverting back to lapack-3.6.1-1.tar.xz proves that it is empty as well
>>>> with the same no dependency rules.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> source only. all the contents is in:
>>>
>>> $ cygcheck -cd |grep lapack
>>> liblapack-devel                         3.7.0-1
>>> liblapack-doc                           3.7.0-1
>>> liblapack0                              3.7.0-1
>>>
>>
>> Then these should be installed dependents of the chosen lapack.  Source
>> only means nothing when you can choose the binary download.
>>
> 
> there are today no packages depending from lapack.
> 

Exactly but the binary install of lapack should require liblapack-devel
and liblapack0.

> I miss the relevance of your last comment; there are
> ~ 473 empty binary package in the distribution.
> 

The installer chooses by default a binary install not a source install.
If there are empty binary installations then those also need to change
to install the expected binary dependencies.

> Please note that lapack is empty but the debug file for the three
> binaries is called lapack-debuginfo anyway as the upstream source file
> is called lapack.

While lapack-debuginfo isn't a requirement for lapack we understand its
purpose and should only be installed if chosen specifically.

-- 
cyg Simple

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -