Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 21:38:13 +0100 From: Erik Cederstrand <erik@cederstrand.dk> To: "O. Hartmann" <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Cc: Current FreeBSD <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, David Chisnall <theraven@FreeBSD.org>, Ports FreeBSD <freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: LLVM 3.2: official stable port is still LLVM 3.1. Basesystem missing important LLVM pieces! Message-ID: <042CBED1-5257-4517-B040-9EE760BE7FE1@cederstrand.dk> In-Reply-To: <50E9B385.9060104@zedat.fu-berlin.de> References: <50E97457.7050809@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <34476030-BDBF-46C4-8E7D-60FDC53B076A@FreeBSD.org> <50E9B385.9060104@zedat.fu-berlin.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Den 06/01/2013 kl. 18.25 skrev "O. Hartmann" = <ohartman@zedat.fu-berlin.de>: >> In contrast, LLVM changes the ABI (and API!) significantly between = point releases. We therefore don't want to encourage anything outside = of the base system to link against these libraries, because doing so = would prevent us from importing a new LLVM release every six months - = we'd either need to ship 4 copies of LLVM by an x.3 release, or stick = with the one that we shipped in x.0. >=20 > Indeed, this is a serious point and the developer of LLVM has to be > blamed for that. You can't seriously blame LLVM for making progress. If ports rely on a = specific version of LLVM, it would be far better to create devel/llvm31, = devel/llvm32 etc. Erik=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?042CBED1-5257-4517-B040-9EE760BE7FE1>