Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 12:05:57 -0800 From: Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> To: Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> Cc: FreeBSD Toolchain <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Attempting llvm20 based poudriere(-devel) bulk -ca use got: "mesa-dri-24.1.7_4 depends on shared library: libLLVM-2.so - not found"; others get same sort of "depends on" message Message-ID: <829C7D83-435A-458D-871F-D363CD1AD581@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <Z7ODTc2Clj7kmTOC@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net> References: <D18B6C38-223B-46C0-B13C-D7FB3D169525@yahoo.com> <5528E984-AEFF-4AEF-81F4-CBA99051F339@yahoo.com> <0A1E6DF5-0EAD-4368-938C-47FA82E5E51B@yahoo.com> <Z7ODTc2Clj7kmTOC@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Feb 17, 2025, at 10:43, Brooks Davis <brooks@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 06:34:46AM -0800, Mark Millard wrote:
>> On Feb 16, 2025, at 06:24, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Feb 16, 2025, at 05:49, Mark Millard <marklmi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I expect that should have been: libLLVM-20.so
>>>>
>>>> So, analogous to:
>>>>
>>>> # find -s / -name "libLLVM*.so*" -print | more
>>>> /usr/local/llvm19/lib/libLLVM-19.so
>>>> /usr/local/llvm19/lib/libLLVM.so
>>>> /usr/local/llvm19/lib/libLLVM.so.19.1
>>>>
>>>> At the moment I do not expect this to be an oddity of
>>>> my personal environment unless it is just for -rc1 .
>>>
>>> Looks to me like one example of code that may get
>>> things wrong for llvm20 is in /usr/ports/Mk/Uses/llvm.mk :
>>>
>>> . . .
>>> . if empty(_LLVM_MK_VERSION)
>>> . if ${LLVM_DEFAULT:N1[0-9]*}
>>> _LLVM_MK_VERSION= ${LLVM_DEFAULT:S/0$//}
>>> . else
>>> _LLVM_MK_VERSION= ${LLVM_DEFAULT}
>>> . endif
>>> . endif
>>> . . .
>>
>> Another area in /usr/ports/Mk/Uses/llvm.mk that may
>> have related problems is tied to:
>>
>> # === define helpers for the dependencies ===
>> . for _ver in ${_LLVM_MK_VALID_VERSIONS:N1[0-9]}
>> _LLVM_MK_SUFFIX_${_ver}= ${_ver}0
>> . endfor
>
> I've removed these bits. It was a leftover from supporting llvm[789]0.
> I think it was also broken for llvm10.
Thanks.
Note:
The :N1[0-9] pattern meant that llvm 10 used:
_LLVM_MK_VERSION= ${LLVM_DEFAULT}
and did not use either of:
_LLVM_MK_VERSION= ${LLVM_DEFAULT:S/0$//}
_LLVM_MK_SUFFIX_${_ver}= ${_ver}0
as I understand. Thus llvm20 is the first >= 10
one to use those 2 lines and the first to have
the problem.
===
Mark Millard
marklmi at yahoo.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?829C7D83-435A-458D-871F-D363CD1AD581>