https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2213372 --- Comment #3 from Jeremy Newton <alexjnewt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> --- Ok I think we can proceed with this. They've already separated HIPCC source from HIP sources, so I'm effectively bundling HIPCC source in the rocclr package for now. Spec URL: https://mystro256.fedorapeople.org/hipcc.spec SRPM URL: https://mystro256.fedorapeople.org/hipcc-5.6.0-3.fc39.src.rpm Copr Build: https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/mystro256/rocm-hip/build/6150230/ I think full deprecation will happen around ROCm 6.0, so I'll start pushing upstream to drop the .bin extension then. Instead of a conflicts, I just handled it as a rename of the "hip" subpackage to hipcc. See rocclr.spec, I renamed "hip" to "hipcc" and copied everything over so the contents of the package should be identical other than the addition of hipcc*.bin. Then, I'll just drop that subpackage from rocclr.spec once this is accepted. I bumped the release to higher than rocclr to make sure it happens smoothly. -- 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=2213372 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202213372%23c3 _______________________________________________ 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
