From owner-freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Tue Dec 3 19:11:07 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-x11@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 DAE271BA0D2 for ; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 19:11:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnikl@justmail.de) Received: from mout1.freenet.de (mout1.freenet.de [IPv6:2001:748:100:40::2:3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.freenet.de", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass Class 2 CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 47SBQz08yRz3L9L; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 19:11:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gnikl@justmail.de) Received: from [195.4.92.165] (helo=mjail2.freenet.de) by mout1.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gnikl@justmail.de) (port 25) (Exim 4.92 #3) id 1icDZe-0001VY-5X; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 20:11:02 +0100 Received: from [::1] (port=53132 helo=mjail2.freenet.de) by mjail2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gnikl@justmail.de) (Exim 4.92 #3) id 1icDZe-0006DN-20; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 20:11:02 +0100 Received: from sub7.freenet.de ([195.4.92.126]:34938) by mjail2.freenet.de with esmtpa (ID gnikl@justmail.de) (Exim 4.92 #3) id 1icDXR-0005BA-Il; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 20:08:45 +0100 Received: from p5dc3f303.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([93.195.243.3]:49559 helo=localhost) by sub7.freenet.de with esmtpsa (ID gnikl@justmail.de) (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305:256) (port 465) (Exim 4.92 #3) id 1icDXR-0003Q5-5p; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 20:08:45 +0100 Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 20:08:37 +0100 From: Gunther Nikl To: Mark Linimon Cc: Jan Beich , freebsd-x11@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mesa: LLVM_DEFAULT usage Message-ID: <20191203200837.00002360@justmail.de> In-Reply-To: <20191202014823.GA26566@lonesome.com> References: <20191201175632.00000bf9@justmail.de> <20191202014823.GA26566@lonesome.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.14.0 (GTK+ 2.24.30; i686-w64-mingw32) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originated-At: 93.195.243.3!49559 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 47SBQz08yRz3L9L X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of gnikl@justmail.de has no SPF policy when checking 2001:748:100:40::2:3) smtp.mailfrom=gnikl@justmail.de X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.35 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_FIVE(0.00)[5]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.96)[-0.962,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.989,0]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[justmail.de]; AUTH_NA(1.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[3.0.0.0.2.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.4.0.0.0.0.1.0.8.4.7.0.1.0.0.2.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.0]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:5430, ipnet:2001:748::/32, country:DE]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; IP_SCORE(-0.30)[ip: (-0.83), ipnet: 2001:748::/32(-0.30), asn: 5430(-0.33), country: DE(-0.01)]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[3.243.195.93.khpj7ygk5idzvmvt5x4ziurxhy.zen.dq.spamhaus.net : 127.0.0.10] X-BeenThere: freebsd-x11@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: X11 on FreeBSD -- maintaining and support List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 19:11:07 -0000 Mark Linimon wrote: > While not germane to the use of LLVM itself, I firmly believe > that the LLVM_DEFAULT Makevar should never be overridden. It is > set in Mk/bsd.default-versions.mk and thus ought to be set by > user choice. > > Please see: > > https://wiki.freebsd.org/HardcodedLLVMVersions#Ports_That_Redefine_LLVM_VERSION I had a look at this wiki page. The mesa ports only recently switched to use of LLVM_DEFAULT. According to the wiki page you believe the mesa port should have kept its MESA_LLVM_VER. It should use LLVM_DEFAULT as a default value if there are no reasons to use a different value. This seems to be a sane suggestion. I cannot tell if the ports tree should use this idiom. Regards, Gunther