Le 08/01/2013 17:24, Pekka Jääskeläinen a écrit : > Also Vincent, should I apply more patches to get the packaging > problems eased? I'm unsure of removing the llvm-config --ldflags > call.
I will apply the patch to remove llvm-config --ldflags in the Debian package as this reduce the dependency between binary packages without any visible effect. You can get the last patch for this here: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/pocl.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/fix_linkage.patch;hb=HEAD or (raw data) : http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/pocl.git;a=blob_plain;f=debian/patches/fix_linkage.patch;hb=HEAD I'm really interrested to know if this last patch works anywhere or not. > Is the script location/search path issue a show-stopper for > the Debian package? The fact that the build directory is searched before is problematic. Here is a patch that try to solve this. It also move internal scripts and tools out of bindir (scripts are moved to pkgdatadir and program to pkglibexecdir). If I do not make errors, calling "make install prefix=..." will trigger the rebuild of scripts/programs/libraries that need it. web: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/pocl.git;a=blob;f=debian/patches/fix_script_path.patch;hb=HEAD raw: http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=collab-maint/pocl.git;a=blob_plain;f=debian/patches/fix_script_path.patch;hb=HEAD About the search : - for scripts, they are updated at install time (to switch from build-tree paths to install paths) - for binaries, they look if the environment variable POCL_BUILDING is defined. If yes (and it is defined in tests/atlocal.in for all tests), the build-tree path is used. If no, the install path is used if the file is here, else the plain name is used. In this latter case, the user is responsible to correctly configure its PATH but this case should never happens on normal use. Then, when digging into source/build system, I see several things I want to ask you if this is normal or not. 1) poclu is installed into /usr/include *and* /usr/include/pocl => in the file include/Makefile.am, poclu.h is included both in pkginclude_HEADERS and include_HEADERS. Is it what you want? 2) some installed headers are required for running OpenCL programs while some others are provided to write new devices, ... In my packaging, I put the first ones with the library itself and the second ones into a separate devel package. Can you check that my split is correct? I put with the library pocl/_kernel.h and pocl/*/types.h I put in the devel package poclu.h, pocl/pocl_device.h, pocl/utlist.h, pocl/poclu.h and pocl/pocl.h 3) in lib/CL/devices/tce/tce_common.cc, there is a reference to SRCDIR. Will this still work if sources are removed after installation? std::string("tcecc --vector-backend -llwpr -I ") + SRCDIR + "/include " + deviceMainSrc + " " + Note that I do not use tce, so I cannot check. 4) debian llvm-3.2 package seems to be built with -fno-rtti. If this is really a problem for pocl (the basic testsuite pass, is it really required?) then I will need to ask llvm maintainers to change this (and hope they accept) Regards, Vincent PS: due to my work schedule, it will be very difficult for me to continue to work on pocl during the next 2 weeks. If some of you want to test -- Vincent Danjean Adresse: Laboratoire d'Informatique de Grenoble Téléphone: +33 4 76 61 20 11 ENSIMAG - antenne de Montbonnot Fax: +33 4 76 61 20 99 ZIRST 51, avenue Jean Kuntzmann Email: [email protected] 38330 Montbonnot Saint Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Master Java SE, Java EE, Eclipse, Spring, Hibernate, JavaScript, jQuery and much more. Keep your Java skills current with LearnJavaNow - 200+ hours of step-by-step video tutorials by Java experts. SALE $49.99 this month only -- learn more at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/learnmore_122612 _______________________________________________ pocl-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pocl-devel
