Am 01/06/13 17:49, schrieb David Chisnall: > On 6 Jan 2013, at 12:55, O. Hartmann wrote: > >> Having a crippled LLVM aboard AND the need having installed a port is a >> kind of none-sense. Why should I install port devel/llvm to have a >> working LLVM backend? > > The issue is the same as the issue for anything in the FreeBSD base system, which is: what level of compatibility do we want to provide? > > In general, we aim to provide a backwards-compatible ABI across an entire major release. This means that anything that runs on 9.0 should work on 9.1 and so on. It should also work on 10.x with the relevant compat packages installed. > > In contrast, LLVM changes the ABI (and API!) significantly between point releases. We therefore don't want to encourage anything outside of the base system to link against these libraries, because doing so would prevent us from importing a new LLVM release every six months - we'd either need to ship 4 copies of LLVM by an x.3 release, or stick with the one that we shipped in x.0. Indeed, this is a serious point and the developer of LLVM has to be blamed for that. > > There is no problem with other base-system tools linking against the base system LLVM libraries, but in this case llvm-config does not need to be installed (and neither do the LLVM headers), because such tools will be built as part of the base system itself. llvm-config is simply as an example. It shows up the first when the build of POCL fails, so I have chossen it to be checked for as the relevant dependency - it was a hunch for the port Makefile I intend to provide. Since I was more focused on having POCL running for my OpenCL moveon on FreeBSD, I wasn't very careful about choosing what to check against. I will change this before I will send the port to be reviewed and revised. > > David > _______________________________________________
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:33 UTC