On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Dave Johansen <davejohansen@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 6:27 AM, Adam Jackson <ajax@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> On Sun, 2015-09-20 at 21:00 +0800, Christopher Meng wrote: >> > On 9/20/15, David Airlie <airlied@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > > It's llvm, there is never a good time to upgrade it and no llvm >> > > release is >> > > backwards compatible. >> > >> > Yes, so unless someone is pretty familiar with LLVM upstream, keep >> > reading every changeset, no body can guarantee what will happen. >> >> That's not really a fair assessment. By far the most important thing >> in Fedora that needs llvm is Mesa. The llvm build system has a fairly >> comprehensive test suite (which, btw, fails on at least arm with 3.6.1, >> but passes on all arches with 3.7), and Mesa has another test suite in >> the form of piglit that we can use to ensure that changing llvm doesn't >> regress llvmpipe or r600 or radeonsi. >> >> So we can in fact be pretty confident that llvm upgrades won't break >> the things we actually use llvm for in Fedora. > > > It sounds like there's a lot of momentum behind the update to 3.7 for F23, > but iwyu ( https://github.com/include-what-you-use/include-what-you-use ) is > built on top of clang and there's still not an upstream release that's > compatible with 3.7 so updating in F23 will break iwyu until a release is > made. So, I personally would prefer that the update to 3.7 only happen in > Rawhide where breakage like this is expected, but I realize that I'm only > one voice of many and that iwyu is used a LOT less than other packages like > Mesa. There is a llvm34 package for such software. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
