From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jan 6 20:38:15 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFD2FD4; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 20:38:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from erik@cederstrand.dk) Received: from csmtp3.one.com (csmtp3.one.com [91.198.169.23]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2311D1735; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 20:38:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.44] (unknown [176.222.238.90]) by csmtp3.one.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C84DA24068F5; Sun, 6 Jan 2013 20:38:12 +0000 (UTC) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.2 \(1499\)) Subject: Re: LLVM 3.2: official stable port is still LLVM 3.1. Basesystem missing important LLVM pieces! From: Erik Cederstrand In-Reply-To: <50E9B385.9060104@zedat.fu-berlin.de> Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2013 21:38:13 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <042CBED1-5257-4517-B040-9EE760BE7FE1@cederstrand.dk> References: <50E97457.7050809@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <34476030-BDBF-46C4-8E7D-60FDC53B076A@FreeBSD.org> <50E9B385.9060104@zedat.fu-berlin.de> To: "O. Hartmann" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1499) Cc: Current FreeBSD , David Chisnall , Ports FreeBSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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: Sun, 06 Jan 2013 20:38:15 -0000 Den 06/01/2013 kl. 18.25 skrev "O. Hartmann" = : >> 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=