| 1 |
On Tuesday, 9 November 2021 2:41:53 PM NZDT Sam James wrote: |
| 2 |
> > On 8 Nov 2021, at 11:18, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Hi, |
| 4 |
> > A few years back I've slotted LLVM and Clang to make the life with |
| 5 |
> > revdeps easier. Long story short, every major LLVM release (which |
| 6 |
> > happens twice a year) breaks API and it takes some time for revdeps to |
| 7 |
> > adjust. Slotting made it possible to install multiple versions |
| 8 |
> > simultaneously, and therefore let "faster" packages use newer LLVM |
| 9 |
> > without being blocked by "slower" packages on the user's system. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > Unfortunately, this ended up pretty bothersome to maintain. Besides |
| 12 |
> > making ebuilds quite complex (and prone to mistakes), I'm hearing more |
| 13 |
> > and more reports of programs being broken through getting multiple LLVM |
| 14 |
> > versions in the link chain. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I think this might just be Blender and friends which are especially fragile. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> We may be able to get away with just coordinating those together. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> > WDYT? |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> If we can help it, I'd really really prefer we don't. Being able to test |
| 23 |
> various different various of Clang quickly (just like gcc) is really |
| 24 |
> helpful. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
I agree. Personally, it's allowed me to narrow down a few bugs in programs/ |
| 28 |
test suites which only occur with specific LLVM/Clang versions. While I could |
| 29 |
just build the different versions locally, slotting in combination with |
| 30 |
package.env really has made testing easier. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> (especially given one day, we might dare to dream of using Clang |
| 33 |
> for the system toolchain. It becomes a lot easier to check for |
| 34 |
> regressions if you can just flip the version.) |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
I'd love to see this one day :-) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
> Best, |
| 40 |
> sam |
Archives