From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Fri Apr 7 00:48:06 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A07DD31012 for ; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 00:48:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3884F5E4; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 00:48:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id EEF035A9F15; Fri, 7 Apr 2017 00:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2017 00:48:04 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: Jeffrey Bouquet Cc: Brooks Davis , "Russell L. Carter" , freebsd-current Subject: Re: how to mark llvm* forbidden? Message-ID: <20170407004804.GA16743@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <20170406172618.GB62417@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.2 (2016-11-26) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Apr 2017 00:48:06 -0000 --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Apr 06, 2017 at 05:35:35PM -0700, Jeffrey Bouquet wrote: >=20 >=20 > On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 17:26:18 +0000, Brooks Davis wrot= e: >=20 > > On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 06:18:37PM -0700, Russell L. Carter wrote: > > > On 04/05/17 15:32, Chris H wrote: > > > > On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 21:51:40 +0000 Brooks Davis = wrote > > > >=20 > > > >> On Wed, Apr 05, 2017 at 11:42:16AM -0700, Chris H wrote: > > > >>> OK I'm chasing -CURRENT, and I performed an initial > > > >>> install, followed by a new world/kernel && ports about a > > > >>> mos ago. Last Friday, I svn upped the system (src && ports), > > > >>> rebuilt/installed world/kernel. I just began rebuilding > > > >>> the ports, only to find that when finished, I will likely > > > >>> end up with every version of llvm && clang from version 3 > > > >>> to the now current 4. My build session is currently tying > > > >>> nearly every core on the CPU with llvm builds. Given that > > > >>> llvm4 comes in base. Is there *any* reason I can not insist > > > >>> that the ports I upgrade, or build, just use the version(s) > > > >>> of clang/llvm in base? If so. How do I inform the ports > > > >>> that they may *only* use the version(s) in base? > > > >> > > > >> In general you can't. There are many reasons including: the base = llvm > > > >> doesn't include the requisite cmake bits for cmake based ports, so= me > > > >> ports use unstable APIs and require specific LLVM versions, and so= me use > > > >> LLVM tools or libraries that aren't built/installed as part of the= base > > > >> system. > > > >> > > > >> There are probably some ports where the base clang is fine but tha= t's > > > >> probably mostly down to someone getting USES variables right. > > > >> > > > >> -- Brooks > > > > Grumble.. That's what I was afraid I might hear. > > > >=20 > > > > Thanks, Brooks! Even if it's not what I was hoping to hear. :) > > >=20 > > > FWIW, this is biting me hard right now too. I feel your > > > pain... I'm a c++17 junky but I might have to let go of > > > llvm-devel. > >=20 > > If you want to track clang development, I would generally dis-recommend > > the llvm-devel port. If you check out from upstream svn/git and build > > with cmake and ninja, then you get pretty efficient incremental builds. > > One nice think about the llvm build infrastructure is that you can use > > it in place in the build's bin directory so you don't even need to > > maintain an installed copy. >=20 > Can/should this be in /usr/ports/UPDATING?=20 That doesn't seem to match the purpose of the file. The purposes of llvm-devel haven't changed over time. It's an erratically updated snapshot to avoid having to deal with the changes that occur over the six-ish month release cycle all at once and to allow people to test if they want to. I update it when I have some free time or when someone asks. It's really most useful as a package. -- Brooks --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJY5uHEAAoJEKzQXbSebgfA1dgH/joAaeKi+mZqMhnPraovAf+I usK/9EWxwps9rMqBjK1EobBTLFpRTC3AZjZa8zk1EULpaUbFJinqzs4FFZtsfgTD etDQH69JAbHuDtHYxbm4/yTCunFEMQGRWewTd+p3UU3D2lIAYAN/SzDYa4SGmeO6 H0bnsE9hGBJTHKLELpSOkUlB+7IKmeXUSmAYe6eUo874GQOPUH0zDiZcfyyGYsu7 ynvRcXHORMNB4rcWKFxZUJtkGexeFMBz8QX6DmF0wbnreKspn59DYY+9jkbS6tjd X8aCan8tBRxEjN2SPDFtp0UhUbIU95m5Hk7up63J8bBmoudV7uBAKvFjvJNvYic= =mYHF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+--