Bug 1342815

Summary: Review Request: openmp - Support for the OpenMP language in LLVM
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Jan Včelák <jv+fedora>
Component: Package ReviewAssignee: Nobody's working on this, feel free to take it <nobody>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: rawhideCC: darcy, jhasse, lampe, package-review, robinlee.sysu, susi.lehtola
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2021-02-14 00:45:27 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 201449    

Description Jan Včelák 2016-06-05 14:22:15 UTC
Spec URL: https://jvcelak.fedorapeople.org/review/openmp/3.8.0-1/openmp.spec
SRPM URL: https://jvcelak.fedorapeople.org/review/openmp/openmp-3.8.0-1.fc24.src.rpm

Description:
The OpenMP subproject of LLVM contains the components required to build an
executable OpenMP program that are outside the compiler itself.

Fedora Account System Username: jvcelak

Comment 1 Jan Včelák 2016-06-05 14:24:43 UTC
*** Bug 1276827 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Jan Včelák 2016-06-05 14:25:38 UTC
Scratch build for Fedora 24:

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=14389928

Comment 3 Michael Lampe 2016-07-19 02:33:52 UTC
I've just used this as a starter for my own purposes. My 2 cents:

* s/OpenMP/OpenML/

* openmp-devel should depend on openmp.

* omp.h should go to %{_libdir}/clang/%{version}/include/

If you don't build openmp separately, it also ends up there. And gcc has its own version in /usr/lib/gcc/x86_64-redhat-linux/x.y.z/include.

* libgomp.so -> libomp.so shouldn't be packaged.

They are not compatible and libgomp.so is already there.

* libiomp5.so -> libomp.so shouldn't be packaged.

Intel calls it libiomp5.so, but I guess libomp.so isn't compatible and nobody has old binaries from Intel's compilers in Fedora.

Comment 4 Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski 2019-02-09 01:27:49 UTC
Looks like this is obsolete:

https://openmp.llvm.org/
...
Status

With the release of Clang 3.8.0, OpenMP 3.1 support is enabled in Clang by default, and the OpenMP runtime is therefore built as a normal part of the Clang build, and distributed with the binary distributions.You do not, therefore, need explicitly to check out this code, or build it out of tree; a normal Clang check out and build will automatically include building these runtime libraries.

Comment 5 Darcy 2019-02-09 07:35:37 UTC
I think so too.  OpenMP works on clang if you install libomp-devel from the repo.

Comment 6 Susi Lehtola 2020-01-14 17:58:08 UTC
There's been no activity in 11 months, can this be closed?

Comment 7 Darcy 2020-01-14 20:04:46 UTC
OpenMP works for my purposes.  Thanks to those involved.

Comment 8 Package Review 2021-01-14 00:45:21 UTC
This is an automatic check from review-stats script.

This review request ticket hasn't been updated for some time. We're sorry
it is taking so long. If you're still interested in packaging this software
into Fedora repositories, please respond to this comment clearing the
NEEDINFO flag.

You may want to update the specfile and the src.rpm to the latest version
available and to propose a review swap on Fedora devel mailing list to increase
chances to have your package reviewed. If this is your first package and you
need a sponsor, you may want to post some informal reviews. Read more at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group.

Without any reply, this request will shortly be considered abandoned
and will be closed.
Thank you for your patience.

Comment 9 Package Review 2021-02-14 00:45:27 UTC
This is an automatic action taken by review-stats script.

The ticket submitter failed to clear the NEEDINFO flag in a month.
As per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_stalled_package_reviews
we consider this ticket as DEADREVIEW and proceed to close it.