GNU bug report logs - #66072
Duplicate/conflicting definitions for ocl-icd

Previous Next

Package: guix;

Reported by: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>

Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:43:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Done: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

To add a comment to this bug, you must first unarchive it, by sending
a message to control AT debbugs.gnu.org, with unarchive 66072 in the body.
You can then email your comments to 66072 AT debbugs.gnu.org in the normal way.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox


Report forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#66072; Package guix. (Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:43:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Acknowledgement sent to Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>:
New bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to bug-guix <at> gnu.org. (Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:43:02 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: bug-guix <at> gnu.org
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Subject: Duplicate/conflicting definitions for ocl-icd
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:34:57 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
Hi.
There are currently two conflicting definitions of ocl-icd in
"opencl.scm":

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(define-public ocl-icd
  (deprecated-package "ocl-icd" opencl-icd-loader))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

and

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(define-public ocl-icd
  (package
    (name "ocl-icd")
    (version "2.3.2")
    (source
     (origin
       (method git-fetch)
       (uri (git-reference
             (url "https://github.com/OCL-dev/ocl-icd")
             (commit (string-append "v" version))))
       (file-name (git-file-name name version))
       (sha256
        (base32 "0y0lnxb6zlhfb5vxxib5n1vvxa4b23qc0j3lsih6yjz9j37mj7wz"))))
    (build-system gnu-build-system)
    (native-inputs
     (list autoconf automake libtool ruby))
    (home-page "https://github.com/OCL-dev/ocl-icd")
    (synopsis "Generic OpenCL @acronym{ICD, Installable Client Driver} loader")
    (description
     "This package provides an OpenCL @acronym{ICD, Installable Client Driver}
loader.  It maintains a YAML database of all known and guessed function pointers
from vendor-specific drivers.  It also delivers a skeleton of bindings to
incorporate inside an OpenCL implementation to give it ICD functionalities.")
    (license license:bsd-2)))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Which is the good one?
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#66072; Package guix. (Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:24:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #8 received at 66072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
To: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
Cc: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>, 66072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Duplicate/conflicting definitions for ocl-icd
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 16:23:12 +0200
Hi,

> Which is the good one?

according to commit 4d1157fca7627c11672df0cd80fae4f4d27e2185 ocl-icd
was dead, which is why I replaced it. I cannot tell which one is better
though. Tobias maybe?

Lars





Information forwarded to bug-guix <at> gnu.org:
bug#66072; Package guix. (Mon, 18 Sep 2023 17:58:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #11 received at 66072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
To: Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Cc: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>, 66072 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Duplicate/conflicting definitions for ocl-icd
Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 19:57:12 +0200
Hi Lars, Guillaume,

Thanks for catching the duplicate!  I removed the ‘deprecated’ one in 
commit 71ec12d8bacd3901e8c7853d3c9403f3d09dfb31.

On 2023-09-18 16:23, Lars-Dominik Braun wrote:
>> Which is the good one?
> 
> according to commit 4d1157fca7627c11672df0cd80fae4f4d27e2185 ocl-icd
> was dead, which is why I replaced it.

It's not clear to me how opencl-icd-loader is related to ocl-icd, so I 
can't partake in that discussion.  They look like totally different 
packages to me.

My only motivation was to fix beignet, which was broken by the 
ocl-icd(.h) removal.

Kind regards,

T G-R

Sent from a Web browser.  Excuse or enjoy my brevity.




Reply sent to Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>:
You have taken responsibility. (Thu, 21 Sep 2023 15:49:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Notification sent to Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>:
bug acknowledged by developer. (Thu, 21 Sep 2023 15:49:01 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

Message #16 received at 66072-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Guillaume Le Vaillant <glv <at> posteo.net>
To: Tobias Geerinckx-Rice <me <at> tobias.gr>
Cc: 66072-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Lars-Dominik Braun <lars <at> 6xq.net>
Subject: Re: Duplicate/conflicting definitions for ocl-icd
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2023 15:44:02 +0000
[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]
As the duplicate has been removed, I'm closing the issue.
If one day we find a conflict between open-icd-loader and ocl-icd, we'll
open a new bug report.
[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <help-debbugs <at> gnu.org> to internal_control <at> debbugs.gnu.org. (Fri, 20 Oct 2023 11:24:08 GMT) Full text and rfc822 format available.

This bug report was last modified 1 year and 203 days ago.

Previous Next


GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.