libamd.2.3.1.a
libamd.a
libbtf.1.2.0.a
libbtf.a
libcamd.2.3.1.a
libcamd.a
libccolamd.2.8.0.a
libccolamd.a
libcholmod.2.1.2.a
libcholmod.a
libcolamd.2.8.0.a
libcolamd.a
libcxsparse.3.1.2.a
libcxsparse.a
libklu.1.2.1.a
libklu.a
libldl.2.1.0.a
libldl.a
librbio.2.1.1.a
librbio.a
libspqr.1.3.1.a
libspqr.a
libsuitesparseconfig.4.2.1.a
libsuitesparseconfig.a
libumfpack.5.6.2.a
libumfpack.a

Obviously the version-numbered libraries are the same as the non-versioned ones.  The package description merely mentions two of the libraries in the set.  Perhaps it should be modified to reflect SuiteSparse's completeness.

If you look at "Other packages required:" on the SuiteSparse home page, it does say that LAPACK is indeed used by SuiteSparseQR and CHOLMOD, hence the dependency in the package manager.

Having UMFPACK as a separate package is somewhat redundant, but it does eliminate some of the reliance on the much larger SuiteSparse package by providing it separately.

I just had a look to the list of the available packages and I saw both SuiteSparse and UMFPack. There are few inconsistencies in the presentation (or the choice) of these two packages! And also some minor errors!

First, UMFPack is usually included in SuiteSparse, among others things (CHOLMOD, SPQR, ...), so it may confuse the reader who examine the package list.

Second, the SuiteSparse package is proposed, but it doesn't contain important soft as CHOLMOD and SPQR.

Third, SuiteSparse is presented as using Blas and Lapack ... yes and no. If I'm not wrong, in the whole SuiteSparse package, only CHOLMOD depends on Blas; besides Lapack is not required for any soft inside SuiteSparse!