From owner-freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Sun Nov 12 12:32:44 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@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 BDB5EE71059 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (unknown [127.0.1.3]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3B9C66721 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id A2FF7E71058; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:44 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: ports@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 A29C2E71057 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from mx.nsu.ru (mx.nsu.ru [84.237.50.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 53CB466720 for ; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: from Debian-exim by mx.nsu.ru with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1eDrRB-0006B9-Jc for ports@freebsd.org; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:32:33 +0700 Received: from [84.237.50.47] (helo=regency.nsu.ru) by mx.nsu.ru with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1eDrRB-0006As-HL; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:32:33 +0700 Received: from regency.nsu.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id vACCf9Pg026274; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 18:41:09 +0600 (NOVT) (envelope-from danfe@regency.nsu.ru) Received: (from danfe@localhost) by regency.nsu.ru (8.14.2/8.14.2/Submit) id vACCf4eT026233; Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:41:04 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from danfe) Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 19:41:04 +0700 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Brooks Davis Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RTTI support in devel/llvm40 (and maybe other llvm ports) Message-ID: <20171112124104.GA25053@regency.nsu.ru> References: <20171110070748.GA27570@regency.nsu.ru> <20171112080319.GB76223@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20171112080319.GB76223@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-KLMS-Rule-ID: 3 X-KLMS-Message-Action: skipped X-KLMS-AntiSpam-Status: not scanned, whitelist X-KLMS-AntiPhishing: not scanned, whitelist X-KLMS-AntiVirus: Kaspersky Security 8.0 for Linux Mail Server, version 8.0.1.705, not scanned, whitelist X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2017 12:32:44 -0000 On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 08:03:19AM +0000, Brooks Davis wrote: > On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 02:07:48PM +0700, Alexey Dokuchaev wrote: > > I've just found out that our `devel/llvm40' port comes without > > -DLLVM_ENABLE_RTTI=ON on the CMAKE_ARGS. This is a regression > > from e.g. 3.4 times when it was enabled by default. > > > > The problem is that RTTI support is required by some consumers, > > e.g. `graphics/openshadinglanguage' and `graphics/appleseed' > > (cf. https://github.com/appleseedhq/appleseed/issues/1625), > > but I cannot enable RTTI in those ports unless I enable it in > > LLVM port(s) first. > > > > The patch is very simple (apart port revision bump): > > > > @@ -39,7 +41,7 @@ > > SUB_LIST= LLVM_PREFIX="${LLVM_PREFIX}" LLVM_SUFFIX="${LLVM_SUFFIX}" > > CMAKE_INSTALL_PREFIX= ${LLVM_PREFIX} > > -CMAKE_ARGS= -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON > > +CMAKE_ARGS= -DLLVM_BUILD_LLVM_DYLIB=ON -DLLVM_ENABLE_RTTI=ON > > > > Could you review/commit it, and check if other LLVM ports could > > also benefit from it? Thanks, > > It's been a few years since we disabled it so I don't remember the > details of the decision. I'll look into it, but am not in a position > to test for breakage to other ports. Well it's probably OK to expect users or maintainers of those ports would speak up if enabling RTTI breaks their software. :-) > IIRC there were once ports that failed to build both with and > without so it may be that we need to wait for flavors to make this > change. Hmm, that's weird: I'd expect it is easier to *not* use RTTI when one does not need it than try to find the way around when it is not available (which might not be possible). I also don't see why we should wait for FLAVORS: if needed, we can always make it optional (cf. existing EXTRAS LIT LLD LLDB options) but enabled by default. ./danfe