| Summary: | enable opencl in x264 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Fedora | Reporter: | Sérgio Basto <sergio> |
| Component: | x264 | Assignee: | Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski <dominik> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | enhancement | CC: | ew-tech, kwizart, leigh123linux, sergio |
| Priority: | P1 | ||
| Version: | f30 | ||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||
| OS: | GNU/Linux | ||
| namespace: | |||
|
Description
Sérgio Basto
2019-03-12 02:07:14 CET
It's dlopened, not dynamically linked, meaning we'd depend on a -devel package at runtime. The why not has been provided. (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #1) > It's dlopened, not dynamically linked, meaning we'd depend on a -devel > package at runtime. Can you elaborate on this ? One can dlopen a versioned shared object. It's not mandatory to rely the "unversioned" symlink to use dlopen. (In reply to Nicolas Chauvet from comment #3) > (In reply to Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski from comment #1) > > It's dlopened, not dynamically linked, meaning we'd depend on a -devel > > package at runtime. > Can you elaborate on this ? One can dlopen a versioned shared object. It's > not mandatory to rely the "unversioned" symlink to use dlopen. If you mean that one can patch common/opencl.c and replace #define ocl_open dlopen( "libOpenCL.so", RTLD_NOW ) with #define ocl_open dlopen( "libOpenCL.so.1", RTLD_NOW ) then I think that should be easy to do, thanks for the tip. I'll get to it eventually or one of the other maintainers should feel free to step in. Note to self: add "Recommends: %{_libdir}/libOpenCL.so.1", too. *** Bug 5239 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** so we should enable opencl ? isn't it ? If you have some free time to do it, go ahead. I outlined what needs to be done in comment #4. |