1 |
On 2020-09-24 12:50, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> That's really weird, point releases should not include breaking |
4 |
> changes. Could you try to figure out why this happens? Also, are you |
5 |
> aware if 9.0.0 vs 9.0.1 had the same problem? Maybe it's one time |
6 |
> upstream screwup. |
7 |
|
8 |
Let's hope so, this was very much an unpleasant surprise. Regarding slot |
9 |
9, I do not remember anyone complaining about it - but then again, I |
10 |
think we only began supporting it in opencl-clang after llvm-9.0.1 had |
11 |
already been stabilised. |
12 |
|
13 |
> A somewhat ugly alternative would be to ~ dep on specific version and |
14 |
> make revbumps for minor llvm bumps. |
15 |
|
16 |
Somewhat ugly indeed, could be worse though - at least |
17 |
dev-util/spirv-llvm-translator and dev-libs/opencl-clang ebuilds support |
18 |
exactly one llvm/clang major version each so no ugly "|| ( ver1:9 |
19 |
ver2:10 ver3:11 )" dependencies will be required. |
20 |
|
21 |
-- |
22 |
Marecki |