Problem with libomp (was supertux)
eborisch at macports.org
Sat Dec 5 19:31:04 UTC 2020
On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 1:25 PM Ken Cunningham <
ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 5, 2020, at 11:21 AM, Eric Borisch <eborisch at macports.org> wrote:
> > We could:
> > * leave the current patch applied to clang-* (to teach clang where to
> get the library if it is installed)
> > * make clang-* no longer depend upon libomp
> > * Add a post-install note of "to enable OpenMP support, install libomp"
> > * Have libomp depends_build upon the latest clang on the platform (is
> there an automagic way to do this?)
> > For most (standard install; many pre-compiled binaries) users, libomp
> would be installed via pre-built packages, and wouldn't have to pull down
> clang to build it.
> > This would also avoid having multiple libomp instances on the system,
> which seems like a "good thing".
> > How does that sound? I like having 'sudo port install clang-X' yield a
> fully featured (-fopenmp just works) compiler, but a reminder note and
> simple "sudo port install libomp" isn't all bad...
> > - Eric
> From a practical point of view great.
> But requiring the manual step to get libomp will never be acceptable to
> MacPorts, as it is buildbot-unfriendly and breaks the reproducible builds
> So we just (I think…) have to have the Portfile addition
> compiler.omp-required 4.5
> (or whatever the command is) also mandate a lilb dep on "port:libomp”.
> Sounds trivial, and gets it out of the clang/llvm tree.
I think we’re envisioning the same thing; ports that want OpenMP support
would depends_lib on libomp through some path. The post-install note would
be there to inform users who are explicitly installing clang-X for their
own use, and want it to support OpenMP. (Since we are suggesting removing
the clang -> libomp dep.)
> - Eric
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the macports-dev