From: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
To: Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>
Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org, darkdefende@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Introducing LLVM_TARGET
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2024 23:47:33 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bk8u8odc.fsf@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87il328ofr.fsf@gentoo.org>
Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> writes:
> Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> writes:
>
>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>> Hi,
>>
>> TL;DR: Given that (not really surprising) the current approach for LLVM
>> dependencies doesn't work, I think it's time to give up and introduce
>> LLVM_TARGETS. This would probably mean introduce llvm-r1.eclass.
>>
>> However, since random apps tend to require old versions of LLVM, I do
>> wonder if we should set the default value globally, or have the eclass
>> generate IUSE defaults, so that everything works out of the box.
>>
>
> I need to think about this bit.
>
>>
>> The problem roughly is that right now we rely on depstrings like:
>>
>> DEPEND="
>> <sys-devel/clang-19:=
>> <sys-devel/llvm-19:=
>> || (
>> ( sys-devel/clang:18 sys-devel/llvm:18 )
>> ( sys-devel/clang:17 sys-devel/llvm:17 )
>> ( sys-devel/clang:16 sys-devel/llvm:16 )
>> )
>> "
>>
>> This kinda works, in the sense that it will enforce that you have
>> a single matching version of LLVM+Clang, and the eclass will use it.
>> However, the := deps on top may be entirely mismatched. For example, if
>> you have llvm:18 and clang:17 (+ llvm:17) installed, you'd get:
>>
>> sys-devel/clang:17=
>> sys-devel/llvm:18=
>>
>> When more packages land on the list, this could lead to quite a mess.
>>
>> So what'd we go for would effectively be:
>>
>> DEPEND="
>> llvm_target_16? ( sys-devel/clang:16 sys-devel/llvm:16 )
>> llvm_target_17? ( sys-devel/clang:17 sys-devel/llvm:17 )
>> llvm_target_18? ( sys-devel/clang:18 sys-devel/llvm:18 )
>> "
>>
>> WDYT?
>
> We should mention that https://bugs.gentoo.org/923228 was the motivation
> that tipped us over the edge here.
>
> We should also consider the https://bugs.gentoo.org/880671 /
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/821955 case, as I think this is going to end up
> solving that too, actually.
>
I suppose it will fix https://bugs.gentoo.org/919150 for us too.
> But yeah, I like it. It solves a request we've had from users for a
> while ("let me choose") and it solves these silly dep games.
>
> Thank you!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-05 23:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-05 17:07 [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Introducing LLVM_TARGET Michał Górny
2024-02-05 23:44 ` Sam James
2024-02-05 23:47 ` Sam James [this message]
2024-02-06 3:33 ` Ionen Wolkens
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87bk8u8odc.fsf@gentoo.org \
--to=sam@gentoo.org \
--cc=darkdefende@gmail.com \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox