ollama: document lack of GPU acceleration in caveats #260965
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
go
|
Caution Please do not modify the bottle block. Bottle block modifications can cause CI to misbehave. |
|
Thanks for contributing to Homebrew! 🎉 It looks like you're having trouble with a CI failure. See our contribution guide for help. You may be most interested in the section on dealing with CI failures. You can find the CI logs in the Checks tab of your pull request. |
| If you require GPU support, please use the official installer: | ||
| https://ollama.com/download |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the Homebrew cask (ollama-app) is the correct option for users who require GPU acceleration.
This caveat is only meant to clarify that the formula builds the CLI/server without GPU backends (CUDA/ROCm/Metal), which can be surprising for users expecting parity with the official installer.
The intention is not to redirect users away from Homebrew, but to set clear expectations and point to the supported alternative when GPU acceleration is required.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think first option should be a cask not upstream binary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated the caveat to recommend the Homebrew cask (ollama-app) as the primary option for users who need GPU acceleration, with the upstream installer mentioned as a secondary alternative.
The intent is to set clear expectations while keeping users within the Homebrew ecosystem when possible. Thanks for the guidance.
|
Please stop creating new pull requests for this change, and instead please update this one. |
|
I apologize for sending it separately the PR instead of updating what I had already created; it will not happen again. |
| sha256 cellar: :any_skip_relocation, arm64_sequoia: "91de1a7590b3faf3a24bda696af207bec349162a9330099f82455782f3a5069b" | ||
| sha256 cellar: :any_skip_relocation, arm64_sonoma: "52c7c15a5b0dda5bd3f49907fcb38a02ce4fd23840faea36351aa9c0b54ddfa7" | ||
| sha256 cellar: :any_skip_relocation, sonoma: "b6d458941e96770b169086afca1fc5caf25dcd18a2c6c43c228a58323bdc7a6a" | ||
| sha256 cellar: :any_skip_relocation, sonoma: "b6d458941e96770b169086afca1fc5caf25dcd18a6a2c6c43c228a58323bdc7a6a" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Something wrong here, should revert this change.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're right — this change was incorrect. I've reverted the Sonoma bottle entry and restored the previous value. Thanks for catching this.
3 participants
HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>, where<formula>is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew test <formula>, where<formula>is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew audit --strict <formula>(after doingHOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>)? If this is a new formula, does it passbrew audit --new <formula>?