[Bug 2133814] Re: NEW package request: llvm-toolchain-rocm

[Talha Can Havadar]

About the comment #8 [putting libraries in /usr/lib]

I have concerns about this, as far as what I heard/see from the folks
involved with amd fork of llvm for rocm. They are not really focused on
making it for general use. All the testing and development effort is
focused on rocm specific features and the things that are used in rocm
stack.

Making it sort of hidden in /usr/lib/rocm/llvm , makes it really opt-in
and prevents accidental linking.

That said, I am also thinking having a proper/consistent naming like
(-rocm) would also not cause harm for users. The only problem is that we
have a lot of libraries (some just assumes the name (hardcoded in
source)) uses those names produced in the current version of llvm-
toolchain-rocm.

I agree that since this will be an LTS release there are rightful
concerns about packaging quality. But can we find a common ground?

For example these are the binaries we put under usr/lib or usr/bin:
```
./usr/lib/libamd_comgr.so -> libamd_comgr.so.3
./usr/lib/libamd_comgr.so.3 -> libamd_comgr.so.3.0.0
./usr/lib/libamd_comgr.so.3.0.0
./usr/bin/hipcc
./usr/bin/hipconfig
```

When I first look at these, I dont think it is easy to confuse them with
upstream llvm artifacts but if any of you have better suggestion for
naming we can discuss (though this would cause changes in upper layers
for sure since all the clients of this rocm packages were using binaries
named like this)

Best Regards,
Talha

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Package Archive Administrators, which is subscribed to the bug report.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2133814

Title:
  NEW package request: llvm-toolchain-rocm

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+bug/2133814/+subscriptions