https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2045955
--- Comment #11 from Jeremy Newton alexjnewt@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".