On 04/05/2011 03:05 PM, Hendrik Weimer wrote: > Michael Wild <[email protected]> writes: > >> On 04/05/2011 03:23 AM, Hendrik Weimer wrote: >>> Michael Wild <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>>> I find this hard to believe, since the package only uses the free >>>> and publicly available API defined by the Khronos group and it is >>>> up to the user of the package against which implementation of >>>> OpenCL he wishes to link. >>> >>> How is this different from Java before OpenJDK was released? >> >> I think it is different because the package will only contain source >> code. It hasn't been processed by or linked against any proprietary, >> non-free software. Of course, one could argue that it is implicitly tied >> to non-free software since there is currently no alternative. So, for >> me, this is kind of a conundrum :-) > > The question is whether one can use ViennaCL without an OpenCL > implementation. If not, then the ViennaCL package must depend on an > OpenCL package, no matter whether it is source code only or not. > >> BTW, there is a free implementation of OpenCL in the works in Mesa, >> called Clover [1]. However, I'm not sure how far along it is and how >> active it is, the last commit is from late November, last year. > > If Clover gets packaged and you can use ViennaCL with it, I see no > problem for the latter to go into main. > > Hendrik
So, this means that ViennaCL must Depends: on some OpenCL implementation. Currently the only one packaged in Debian (still in experimental) I can find is the one from NVIDIA. So, this probably means then that it really has to go into contrib, right? Reading the ITP for the OpenCL headers [1] also confirms this. Thanks for the help Michael [1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=598477 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
