On 30 Mar 2017, at 19:06, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe_at_FreeBSD.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 27, 2017 at 11:41:40AM +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: >> On 26 Mar 2017, at 23:36, Mark Millard <markmi_at_dsl-only.net> wrote: >>> ... >>> Also interesting was: >>> >>> Installed packages to be REMOVED: >>> llvm40-4.0.0.r4 >>> >>> Number of packages to be removed: 1 >>> >>> The operation will free 49 GiB. >> >> Yes, this is big. But there is no real need to build the llvm ports >> with debug information, unless you want to hack on llvm itself. > > Cc'ing jmd_at_ and rezny_at_. > > I've been watching increasing size of our LLVM packages with increasing > worry. This is from my tinderbox cache: > > $ % env LANG=C ls -lh llvm3* > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 17M Jan 29 2016 llvm35-3.5.2_1.txz > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 18M Mar 7 2016 llvm36-3.6.2_2.txz > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 27M Feb 28 01:05 llvm37-3.7.1_4.txz > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 207M Jan 19 18:20 llvm38-3.8.1_5.txz > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 244M Mar 23 16:42 llvm39-3.9.1_2.txz > > Dimitry, do you know what had causes such a huge bump in 37 -> 38? Yes, up to llvm37, the ports were split in devel/llvmXY and lang/clangXY parts, with separate ports for e.g. compiler-rt and other LLVM projects. For llvm38 and later, the devel/llvmXY port contains almost *all* upstream LLVM components, which are then selectable at port configure time. For instance, devel/llvm40 shows: ┌─────────────────────────────── llvm40-4.0.0 ─────────────────────────────────┐ │ ┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ │ │ [x] CLANG Build clang │ │ │ │ [x] COMPILER_RT Sanitizer libraries │ │ │ │ [x] DOCS Build and/or install documentation │ │ │ │ [x] EXTRAS Extra clang tools │ │ │ │ [x] GOLD Build the LLVM Gold plugin for LTO │ │ │ │ [x] LIT Install lit and FileCheck test tools │ │ │ │ [x] LLD Install lld, the LLVM linker │ │ │ │ [x] LLDB Install lldb, the LLVM debugger (ignored on 9.x) │ │ │ │ [x] OPENMP Install libomp, the LLVM OpenMP runtime library │ │ │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ │ ├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤ │ < OK > <Cancel> │ └──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ If you want to reduce the size of the package, only select the part(s) you need. I think you can get by with just the CLANG option, for most dependent ports. > They take lots of time to build and package. And given that llvm > is indirect dependency of any X11-related port, it pessimises their > build times as well (devel/libclc now requires devel/llvm40 after > r437268). The previous split looks pretty hard to maintain, so that is most likely the reason for combining all components in one port after 3.8. Unfortunately the side effect is that it is way less granular. If we ever get infrastructure for generating multiple packages out of one port, the devel/llvm* ports are very good candidates. :) > With 49 GiB llvm40, I guess I won't be able to build-test post as my > hardware would just not be capable enough. As said, this is because of WITH_DEBUG. Don't use that for the llvm ports, for now. It will also allow you to build them with much less RAM in the machine: especially linking can take multiple GB when debuginfo is enabled, and optimization is off. -Dimitry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:11 UTC