https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955
--- Comment #11 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt(a)fastmail.com> ---
(In reply to Felix Schwarz from comment #9)
Well, that's fine by me if it helps getting the patch applied. In
general it
would be nice if ROCm development would happen more in the open. As a Fedora
packager please be aware of your special position as an AMD employee. I know
it's very tempting to use "private" (and more efficient) communication but
it excludes other (also potential) Fedora packagers. So in general it would
be nice if the public git repos would put everyone on the same footing (I
think also AMD would benefit from that eventually).
Yes, I figured it was one line, so it would be submitted fast, but that was
about a month ago now... I'll follow up, and if I don't get a response, I'll
make a pull request.
> %{_libdir}/libamd_comgr.so.*
Please list a more specific so name: The idea is that the packager should be
aware of soname changes and this is more likely if (s)he needs to adapt the
file name in the .spec explicitely. See also:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/
#_listing_shared_library_files
Understood, I'll use libfoo.so.X{,.*} as per the guidelines (e.g. include
major).
packaging problems or should I also expect functional problems?
While I haven't specifically tested 5.0.0 on real HW, I don't expect functional
issues.
The issues are mostly packaging related.
(In reply to Felix Schwarz from comment #10)
Why does "rocm-comgr-devel-5.0.0-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm"
provide
"rocm-compilersupport-devel"? If nothing depends on that specific name, I
guess we should not provide it.
That's fair, I'll drop it. I'm not sure of my original rational
One thought about naming:
The package description says: "The AMD Code Object Manager (Comgr) is a
shared library which provides operations for creating and inspecting code
objects." If this is only a shared library maybe the subpackage should be
called "libcomgr"? Not sure about this though.
"libcomgr" is a very Debian style of naming packages. I prefer rocm-comgr
because it's more descriptive to users, which seems like the more fedora thing
to do :)
E.g. Fedora has:
icd-ocl (icd loader for opencl)
where Debian has:
ocl-icd-libopencl1
Although with that said, the library is actually called libamd_comgr, so
alternatively we can match the cmake file name and call the package
"amd-comgr". I can hold off updating the spec to give it some thought.
In contrast, upstream just calls their package "comgr".
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955