Subject: [bug#47619] [PATCH] add pt-scotch-shared/scotch-shared

From: Ludovic Courtès <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2021 11:59:48 +0200

Hi,

Eric Bavier <[email-masked]> skribis:

> On Thu, 2021-04-08 at 09:21 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Hello,
>> I was wondering whether we should provide exclusively shared libraries,
>> as we do for other packages, instead of keeping ‘scotch’ and
>> ‘scotch-shared’.  Thoughts?
>
> I know in the past many in the HPC realm have wanted to have static
> libraries available, to avoid the costs associated with start-up
> linking and global function table indirection.
>
> Some current developments, such as some HPC system vendors moving to
> support only shared libraries on future systems, suggests that this
> preference might be waning.

Yeah, I doubt this preference is justified, I feel it’s more one of
these cultural things.  But yeah, let’s keep both for now.

Would it make sense to rename “scotch” to “scotch-static” and
“scotch-shared” to “scotch”, for consistency?

Ludo’.