[Bug 2209759] Review Request: rocclr - ROCm Compute Language Runtime

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2209759



--- Comment #18 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> ---
Ok updated, should be much better now:
Spec URL: https://mystro256.fedorapeople.org/rocclr.spec
SRPM URL: https://mystro256.fedorapeople.org/rocclr-5.5.1-5.fc39.src.rpm
copr build:
https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mystro256/rocm-hip/build/5995610/

Note that there's a planned koji outage right now, so it'll take me time to
update rocm-device-libs with the fixed paths, so I uploaded the fixed package
to my copr for testing.

Some responses to comments I missed:

> +# it would be good if these rocm packages were versioned so
> +# we are not mixing 5.5.0 and 5.5.1

I'm not sure which this is referring to. Comgr and device libs is not ROCm
versioned because I forked it to be more aligned with LLVM releases. For some
background, upstream ROCm builds against unstable LLVM, so I can't really
package official ROCm releases with Fedora, rather I've resorted to forking and
making my own release branches until ROCm moves it into llvm-project proper,
which I believe is on their TODO list.

As for rocminfo and rocm-runtime. I don't generally update it beyond .0 unless
there's fixes, e.g. no update from 5.5.0 to 5.5.1 because they rarely update it
and they retag the same git hash most of the time. It's a lot of package update
curn to update packages that don't changes. When I back-port to EPEL, I always
rebuild the latest though, since I only update it when a new RHEL is released.

I added ">= %{rocm_version}" to the BuildRequires/Requires to reduce mixing. I
can add a provides for the rocm_version to these packages if you want stricter
requirements. E.g. to rocminfo I can add "Provides: rocminfo(rocm) =
%{rocm_release}" and then have these packages depend on that.

Current rpmlint output:
> hip.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipcc
> hip.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipcc.pl
> hip.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipconfig
> hip.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipconfig.pl
> hip-devel.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipcc_cmake_linker_helper
> hip-devel.noarch: W: no-manual-page-for-binary hipdemangleatp
> rocm-clinfo.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary rocm-clinfo
> rocm-hip-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary roc-obj
> rocm-hip-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary roc-obj-extract
> rocm-hip-devel.x86_64: W: no-manual-page-for-binary roc-obj-ls
> hip-devel.noarch: W: no-documentation
> rocm-clinfo.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> rocm-hip-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> rocm-opencl.x86_64: W: no-documentation
> rocm-opencl-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2209759
_______________________________________________
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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue




[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite Conditions]     [KDE Users]

  Powered by Linux