Bug 110967

Summary:	Naming packages with pro suffix depending if open or close source
Product:	DRI	Reporter:	Andrew Shark <ashark>
Component:	DRM/AMDgpu-pro	Assignee:	Default DRI bug account <dri-devel>
Status:	RESOLVED INVALID	QA Contact:
Severity:	enhancement
Priority:	medium
Version:	unspecified
Hardware:	Other
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
i915 platform:		i915 features:
Bug Depends on:
Bug Blocks:	110956

Description Andrew Shark 2019-06-22 04:20:03 UTC

In 19.20-812932 release for Ubuntu there appeared packages roct-amdgpu-pro and roct-amdgpu-pro-dev.
They have a MIT license, but contains -pro suffix.
Is there any specific intention to do so? I thought that only proprietary packages should have that suffix.

Also there are packages:
amf-amdgpu-pro
opencl-amdgpu-pro-comgr
opencl-amdgpu-pro-dev
opencl-amdgpu-pro-hip
What about their suffixes?

Comment 1 Eric Engestrom 2019-06-22 15:52:40 UTC

Ubuntu packaging issue; this needs to be reported to Ubuntu instead.

Comment 2 Eric Engestrom 2019-06-22 17:57:22 UTC

TIL AMD does its support via our bugzilla...

Comment 3 Jeremy Newton 2019-07-29 20:15:52 UTC

The pro suffix denotes that it's a part of the PRO stack, not propriety (yes misleading name, I know).

"PRO" does not mean it's closed source, though most of the PRO stack is closed.

ROCT for example is MIT as it's borrowed from ROCm.

As for the rest:
-AMF is closed source AFAIK
-opencl is closed source; this will be migrated to ROCm (MIT), but this is low priority since ROCm is already completely packaged elsewhere.

We might strip the -pro from roct when we switch to ROCm, but I don't believe there's a plan set in stone right now.

Closing as invalid for now.

Use of freedesktop.org services, including Bugzilla, is subject to our Code of Conduct. How we collect and use information is described in our Privacy Policy.