[onnx] Add features to use ONNX build options

[luncliff]

Changes

Make the following CMake build options to features in vcpkg.json

https://github.com/onnx/onnx/blob/b86cc54efce19530fb953e4b21f57e6b3888534c/CMakeLists.txt#L27-L28

References

• Help [onnx,onnxruntime] new port for v1.18.0 with onnx 1.16.0 #36850
• [onnx] support more features luncliff/vcpkg-registry#141

Checklist

• Changes comply with the maintainer guide.
• SHA512s are updated for each updated download.
• The "supports" clause reflects platforms that may be fixed by this new version.
• Any fixed CI baseline entries are removed from that file.
• Any patches that are no longer applied are deleted from the port's directory.
• The version database is fixed by rerunning ./vcpkg x-add-version --all and committing the result.
• Only one version is added to each modified port's versions file.

[Neumann-A]

should probably be made a positive feature instead since it gives a shorter feature name.

[luncliff]

Good idea. I will change them

[luncliff]

Changed their names in 02fe04d

[WangWeiLin-MV]

Based on the discussion, the revert feature here may cause fail when it's being enabled by other ports (means NO ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION).

[luncliff]

Back to disable-static-registration in f339729
(note disable-static-generation was wrong name 😱 )

[WangWeiLin-MV]

Looks like it disables function, will enabling these two features cause failed for consumers? - do-not-use-features-to-control-alternatives-in-published-interfaces

[luncliff]

Looks like it disables function, will enabling these two features cause failed for consumers? - do-not-use-features-to-control-alternatives-in-published-interfaces

Honestly. I didn't check deeply for the part because I haven't encountered build errors in my team.
Let me check it

[luncliff]

ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION doesn't affect the public interface, but the implementation's behavior.

• https://github.com/onnx/onnx/blob/b86cc54efce19530fb953e4b21f57e6b3888534c/onnx/defs/schema.cc#L1100-L1102

[luncliff]

Sorry for being late.
I added static-registration for default-features to make ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION=OFF just like the upstream's default option

[dg0yt]

I added static-registration for default-features to make ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION=OFF just like the upstream's default option

Note that there are three ports which currently depend on plain "onnx", i.e. implicitly with default features enabled.

[luncliff]

Yes. static-registration is the default feature. The user ports won't be affected

[dg0yt]

The point is that without updating the other ports, it is not possible to disable the feature when you use one of these ports.

[luncliff]

Understood. I can change the `static-generation` to `disable-static-generation` if the part can cause some problem. Do you think it's a better option?

…

On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 2:27 PM Kai Pastor ***@***.***> wrote: The point is that without updating the other ports, it is not possible to disable the feature when you use one of these ports. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#38879 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADLSYE6JO5PEXVF32EAKWJ3ZE22DHAVCNFSM6AAAAABID2NBY2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDCMZYG4YDQOBSGA> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

-- *Profile*Facebook: fb.com/luncliff GitHub: github.com/luncliff LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/dong-ha-park-171481229/

[dg0yt]

?

No. Non-additive features aren't accepted, for good reasons.
It is probably the best to add "default-features": false to the other three ports. (Use git grep '"onnx"' ports/*/vcpkg.json.)

[WangWeiLin-MV]

The revert feature may cause failure when it's being enabled by other ports (enable inverted feature static-registrationmeans means NO ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION=0).

It is probably the best to add "default-features": false to the other three ports.

This is a fragile workaround causes incompatibility in a case vcpkg install onnx[static-registrationmeans] onnxruntime according to the discussion.

[dg0yt]

AFAIU:
(A) It is convenient and expected to have static registration in onnx when it is used directly.
(B) It is not possible to have static registration in onnx when onnxruntime is used.

(A) can only be achieved by a default-enabled capability, like a default-feature.
(B) requires the user (i.e. the top-level manifest) to disable onnx static registration when the project uses onnxruntime.

In vcpkg CI, we have both (A) and (B).

It is probably the best to add "default-features": false to the other three ports.

This is a fragile workaround causes incompatibility in a case vcpkg install onnx[static-registration] onnxruntime according to the discussion.

When you ask for failure, you get failure. Maybe the diagnostics could signal this early.

---

The alternative is to not change anything and require triplet customization in order to use onnxruntime.

[luncliff]

For existing ports and vcpkg CI,
I think removing the default-features (like what we did previously) and adding disable-static-registration feature is more simple because the other ports don't need to care about onnx changes.

Thankfully, ONNX_DISABLE_STATIC_REGISTRATION doesn't change the interface.
Unless vcpkg CI runs executables which requires ONNX, the port builds & installations will be fine.

[WangWeiLin-MV]

The port features installation tests pass with the following triplets:

• x64-windows

[BillyONeal]

@dg0yt 's analysis in #38879 (comment) seems correct to me; I think this needs to be controlled with an overlay-port rather than features.

[luncliff]

Seems like no more comment.

You can close the PR with the team's decision.

[BillyONeal]

Related: #36850 . The discussion of the features-as-alternatives problem appears to have been discussed there.