From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F724158086 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 70AE62BC0E0; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.archeia.com (blink.archeia.com [172.104.236.83]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1CFA2E0729 for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.archeia.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A95EC3F3CF for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:41 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.archeia.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (blink.archeia.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T46MMpZmkhos for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [192.168.0.30] (cpc114120-lee213-2-0-cust896.7-1.cable.virginm.net [86.28.147.129]) by mail.archeia.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C59093F36A for ; Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:55:39 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=archeia.com; s=202108; t=1636372539; bh=QE1Es5pZD6gpnIpMbaMZu3cFP30cElG57n9ivkfDwSg=; h=Subject:To:References:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=zpNbqkJW3Vopkbd1McUudEYUI9pY1oA+IE+C1AiySXMLRHo5MtdxQCl0Fipbx5bp6 Ycxmzgwe5tSOy0wwI5xEEUmCuxtKR6OpMJrosftJI5+wYCRJwZ0moj+DGdx2zPQdRn XltqSsP8JHdzPa8us1S8I9JjrXZiSoGLHeulelL5SW3VsChdtTwG1KQXMPTqCn6I4y n/mUtBuw2sgq0ijbyHoys0G9DZ7AM2sU20G5fEnEyXS9NLRgJXLSPHEJnEVbsOrDTZ eBmuQ5ijw5X1HBiQW+YX/jA3NGS81i0gk5PVZrFPAXPDvJSdnjaSrUoa9bQFEixQqA eGMr6ADlv15E4BuFtVyYzzo+dTlPSko3l5pmLI1veyYZofOJZEljOARzwibR2vtQon 9RLBEskPTrMNRXdPoXtSZrC/HDYKN/gYIi2BJTu+NZlTQ76oOHtV+vxVnUw57vPg9u 1hjENGsmj1NcAsNyueNt0XKSpg86hiy1vR+WGKDqhi6G/FbbUCQQX7RfOlpzTtmu+p aMyKFjKu35wf5EeRkCTLlD1vqv5XVigg23hZKGkIxOpqWyYBPGIMxgwwdoTiQk+IBN k77xvHQNAeEJ7I6XyJA+jxnixvfllwv6x0oVDKGOFSz2RU5nUMifj0DoeYf1n3vfsJ scCTqFT+LtAFd37WOK95I3Xg= Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Un-slotting LLVM To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <178b84fb73ee4e5dfea09b123b568a38f3f67f26.camel@gentoo.org> From: "Luke A. Guest" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2021 11:54:03 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <178b84fb73ee4e5dfea09b123b568a38f3f67f26.camel@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-GB Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: fa338900-2ac7-493d-a6b9-105bd1d552b1 X-Archives-Hash: f44985471a690dc202fdb05658dda717 This would stop other projects from working where they have their own llvm port, cough rocm cough. On 08/11/2021 11:18, Michał Górny wrote: > Hi, > > A few years back I've slotted LLVM and Clang to make the life with > revdeps easier. Long story short, every major LLVM release (which > happens twice a year) breaks API and it takes some time for revdeps to > adjust. Slotting made it possible to install multiple versions > simultaneously, and therefore let "faster" packages use newer LLVM > without being blocked by "slower" packages on the user's system. > > Unfortunately, this ended up pretty bothersome to maintain. Besides > making ebuilds quite complex (and prone to mistakes), I'm hearing more > and more reports of programs being broken through getting multiple LLVM > versions in the link chain. > > This is not something that can be easily solved. In other words, it's > a mess and I don't think we're really getting anywhere. For this > reason, I'm considering dropping slotting and going back to permitting > only a single version of LLVM and Clang being installed. > > This would have two major implications: > > 1. If you installed any package that requires older LLVM, it'd block all > other packages from updating. If you hit two packages that do not have > a common supported LLVM version, you won't be able to install them > at all. > > On the plus side, this will motivate developers to actually start fixing > these packages rather than letting them rot until I start removing old > LLVM versions. > > 2. We will no longer support having multiple clang versions installed. > While it was convenient for testing stuff, it's not really a killer > feature though. > > The only real alternative I see is actively limiting supported LLVM > versions in packages to ensure that all libraries in the depgraph end up > using the same LLVM version. However, I don't think it's really worth > the effort. > > I don't have a ready unslotting plan yet. > > WDYT? >