From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org  Wed Jul 15 09:07:52 2020
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1])
 by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12A3C35E8BD
 for <freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:07:52 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from hmurray@megapathdsl.net)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net
 (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4B6BP32Jspz481K
 for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:07:50 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from hmurray@megapathdsl.net)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5204F40605C;
 Wed, 15 Jul 2020 02:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
cc: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Subject: clang versions
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 02:07:50 -0700
Message-Id: <20200715090750.5204F40605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4B6BP32Jspz481K
X-Spamd-Bar: ++
Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none;
 spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of hmurray@megapathdsl.net has no SPF policy
 when checking 64.139.1.69) smtp.mailfrom=hmurray@megapathdsl.net
X-Spamd-Result: default: False [2.11 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[];
 FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[];
 MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[megapathdsl.net];
 AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.12)[0.123];
 TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.08)[-0.080];
 RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.57)[0.569];
 R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[];
 FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[];
 MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+];
 ASN(0.00)[asn:4565, ipnet:64.139.0.0/18, country:US];
 RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]
X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33
Precedence: list
List-Id: User questions <freebsd-questions.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-questions/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-questions-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2020 09:07:52 -0000


I've got an 11.4 system with clang 10.0.0
I've got several 12.1-RELEASE-p6 systems with clang 8.0.1

I'd expect the newer releases to have newer (or at least the same) versions of 
clang.

Yet the full version info says:

FreeBSD clang version 8.0.1 (tags/RELEASE_801/final 366581) (based on LLVM 8.0.1)
Target: x86_64-unknown-freebsd12.1
Thread model: posix
InstalledDir: /usr/bin

The Target line makes me think this is what was intended.

Can somebody confirm that this apparent reversal of the version numbers is expected?  If not, how do I fix it?  (I may have fatfingered something when driving freebsd-update.)

If this is expected, is there a good story?


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.