| 1 |
Dnia September 24, 2020 10:35:12 AM UTC, Marek Szuba <marecki@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 2 |
>Hi all, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>While fighting with https://bugs.gentoo.org/743992 I discovered that it |
| 5 |
>is necessary for dev-libs/opencl-clang to be rebuilt after EVERY update |
| 6 |
>of LLVM and Clang - even such a supposedly trivial one as from 10.0.0 |
| 7 |
>to |
| 8 |
>10.0.1. To the best of my knowledge there is currently no way in-slot |
| 9 |
>LLVM/Clang updates to trigger rebuilds of dependent packages, and the |
| 10 |
>simplest (only?) way of doing this would be to add subslots to |
| 11 |
>sys-devel/llvm and sys-devel/clang ebuilds. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>Therefore: |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
>1. Is the above correct? I shall be happy to be proven wrong if there |
| 16 |
>is |
| 17 |
>a simpler way of achieving this after all; |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
That's really weird, point releases should not include breaking changes. Could you try to figure out why this happens? Also, are you aware if 9.0.0 vs 9.0.1 had the same problem? Maybe it's one time upstream screwup. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
>2. If I am not wrong about the current state of affairs, what are your |
| 23 |
>opinions about adding subslots to LLVM and Clang ebuilds? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
I would like to avoid that, as it would prevent us from using ':=' to match slots, and cause unnecessary rebuilds in lots of packages. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
A somewhat ugly alternative would be to ~ dep on specific version and make revbumps for minor llvm bumps. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Best regards, |
| 31 |
Michał Górny |
Archives