On 05/09/2012 05:57 PM, Jon Masters wrote: > More broadly though, I feel that GCC is well represented in terms of > engineering knowledge but I'm *concerned* that we run the risk of > growing a dependence on LLVM that is more critical than the LLVMpipe > stuff. Before we can blink, we might need LLVM for building lots of > other fundamental stuff. I am wondering if as a distribution we ought to > have an official FESCo-debated position on LLVM use? I do not think > Fedora has the resources to maintain two critical toolchain pieces. I do > think LLVM is useful, etc. BUT its growing use is concerning. Putting that another way, if we carried eglibc in Fedora, there would be cries and shouts if a large number of packages started requiring it because we have folks that maintain GLIBC. I feel LLVM is a similar piece of critical technology that we should not need for critpath. Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
