@makoto2600 there is still not tagged version for this new code. And the current git master fails to build at the time of writing.
Search Criteria
Package Details: zluda 2-3
Package Actions
Git Clone URL: | https://aur.archlinux.org/zluda.git (read-only, click to copy) |
---|---|
Package Base: | zluda |
Description: | A drop-in replacement for CUDA on Intel Skylake/Gen9 or newer GPUs |
Upstream URL: | https://github.com/vosen/ZLUDA/ |
Licenses: | MIT, Apache |
Conflicts: | nvidia-utils |
Submitter: | dbermond |
Maintainer: | dbermond |
Last Packager: | dbermond |
Votes: | 6 |
Popularity: | 0.008834 |
First Submitted: | 2021-02-22 23:31 (UTC) |
Last Updated: | 2022-11-14 10:58 (UTC) |
Dependencies (6)
- level-zero-loader (level-zero-loader-gitAUR, level-zero-loader-legacyAUR)
- opencl-icd-loaderAUR (khronos-ocl-icd-loaderAUR, khronos-ocl-icd-gitAUR, ocl-icd)
- git (git-gitAUR, git-glAUR) (make)
- level-zero-headers (level-zero-headers-gitAUR, level-zero-headers-legacyAUR) (make)
- opencl-headers (opencl-headers-gitAUR) (make)
- rust (rust-nightlyAUR, rustup-gitAUR, rust-nightly-binAUR, rust-gitAUR, rust-beta-binAUR, rustup-stubAUR, rustup) (make)
Required by (0)
Sources (3)
dbermond commented on 2024-10-07 18:31 (UTC)
makoto2600 commented on 2024-10-07 14:55 (UTC)
@danir.de Looks like it's back : https://vosen.github.io/ZLUDA/blog/zludas-third-life/
danir.de commented on 2024-07-05 11:39 (UTC)
@dbermond As far as i know the original zluda repository is abandoned. vosen also states that it's abdoned in the "What's the future of the project?" section of the Readme. The fork is more actively maintained and has newer releases. Just wanted to leave it here to improve this AUR entry.
dbermond commented on 2024-07-03 16:08 (UTC)
@danir.de The repository that you pointed is a fork of the original zluda repository.
danir.de commented on 2024-07-02 03:00 (UTC)
Isn't the upstream git repo this package is build from outdated? As far as I know, the new maintainer now is: https://github.com/lshqqytiger/ZLUDA
JP-Ellis commented on 2024-06-27 02:31 (UTC)
That's fair enough, I did not realise there this incompatibility.
dbermond commented on 2024-06-27 02:24 (UTC)
@JP-Ellis zluda version 3 requires rocm 5.7. Without this specific rocm version, it does not build/work properly. The rocm available in the official repositories is at version 6.x, which is not suitable. There is no rocm5.7 package available in the AUR, and creating/maintaining it is a real pain due to the high amount of work involved. Feel free to suggest and propose something, or convince upstream to support rocm 6.x.
JP-Ellis commented on 2024-06-27 01:25 (UTC)
Any plans on updating this to the latest release? It's been flagged as out of date for 4 months now. I understand the latest version drops support for Intel, but some people might still want to install the updated version to use with AMD GPUs.
drws commented on 2024-03-20 22:06 (UTC)
I thought of zluda2
before but it might interfere with mainline v2 in the future. Anyway, regarding the new version there seems to be an active fork:
dbermond commented on 2024-03-18 22:53 (UTC)
@drws splitting a package into different versions of the same upstream software should be avoided, as different versions usually requires totally different maintenance actions. Instead, a different package should be created for each desired version. See versioned packages in the official repositories (for example, gcc, llvm, etc). And the package should not be named 'zluda-intel' IMHO, but 'zluda2' to reflect the version, with the target hardware being explained in pkgdesc. Besides, I have found no reasonable/acceptable way to build version 3 here, since it depends on outdated/unsupported rocm.
Pinned Comments
dbermond commented on 2024-06-27 02:24 (UTC)
@JP-Ellis zluda version 3 requires rocm 5.7. Without this specific rocm version, it does not build/work properly. The rocm available in the official repositories is at version 6.x, which is not suitable. There is no rocm5.7 package available in the AUR, and creating/maintaining it is a real pain due to the high amount of work involved. Feel free to suggest and propose something, or convince upstream to support rocm 6.x.