Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] llvm

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: flux <flux AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] llvm
  • Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 08:04:43 +0900

Treeve Jelbert (treeve AT scarlet.be) wrote [12.06.13 02:29]:
> On Tuesday 12 June 2012 15:52:02 Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > any reason we have llvm 2.9 in test grimoire?
> > I wanted to cast lightspark and got "LLVM !=2.9 is required!".
> > Any reason we have devel-llvm-3.0 branch with llvm 3.0 and
> > devel-xorg-modular branch with llvm 3.1?
>
> devel-llvm-3.0 was merged into devel-xorg-modular because of mesalib
> subsequent updates to llvm were done in devel-xorg-modular
>
> > Any protest to pull 3.1 into master?
>
> there are several things in devel-xorg-modular which need the latest llvm,
> so
> they should be pulled as well:
>
> opengtl
> mesalib-8.0.3 ?
>
> Older versions of these do not build with latest llvm
>
>
> Might be best to merge all of devel-xorg-modular ????

This is absolutely the wrong solution. You're suggesting that dependees
must be merged just to have the dependency. If it were the other way
around (ie if llvm depended on opengtl and mesalib), then, yes, they
should be pulled along with llvm (*if* llvm is pulled). The fact is,
opengtl and mesalib have nothing to do with llvm being updated, unless
current spell versions break with the newer version of llvm.

AFAIK, little or no testing has been done with the newer version(s) of
llvm, aside from building these particular spells (and the spells that
were added to the llvm-3.0 branch that were _also_ unrelated to llvm
itself).

Remember: llvm is basically a compiler. That means that it's like gcc.
Treat it like gcc. We don't allow spurious updates to newer versions of
gcc, so we should do the same for llvm. Sorcery is currently incapable
of utilizing a compiler other than gcc, but it's possible that some of
our users have projects that depend on llvm for building, so we should
try to guarantee that it actually works.

The llvm-3.0 branch is problematic, as I pointed out earlier, because it
includes unrelated changes, so anyone who wanted to test just llvm would
have to also deal with those other changes -- adding the branch locally
and doing a system update or system rebuild would get them spell updates
they might not want which aren't actually needed for testing llvm
anyway. Pushing the updates into the xorg-modular branch are just as
problematic for the same reason.

Seeing as how the llvm-3.0 branch is essentially dead, I recommend
deleting the llvm-3.0 branch, then starting a llvm-3.1 branch in which
_only_ llvm is updated and tested. If there are spells that MUST be
changed because they _break_ with the newer version of llvm, then those
spells should also be changed in the llvm-3.1 branch. After testing,
then it can be merged into test.

--
Justin "flux_control" Boffemmyer
Cauldron wizard and general mage
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgp43cJ7BYXjx.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page