On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 2:25 PM Tulio Magno Quites Machado Filho <tuliom@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Considering that LLVM releases usually happen very late in Fedora's > development cycle, if the default LLVM version is changed, packages may > start to FTBFS very late in the development cycle if they buildrequire > the default LLVM version. > > Notice that, in this proposal, packages that would prefer to use the new > version may still update them by buildrequiring the new versioned package. I would rather see the llvm base package(s) always be the latest (and perhaps greatest), and for there to be something like a llvm-not-the-latest (or some other well known name) so that those whose packages are known to be llvm version sensitive can make a one-time change to use the not-the-latest version of llvm (i.e. put the onus of using not-the-latest with the package(r)s that need not-the-latest, or some specific version) so that they can be more assured of not having last minute FTBFS issues. Do we have any idea how many code bases are actually sensitive to the specific llvm version? I suspect that there are a few likely well known and expected code bases, and most code bases are (mostly) agnostic. -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
