https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955 --- Comment #11 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- (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 _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
