Kamil Rytarowski <n54%gmx.com@localhost> writes: > I've performed quasi bulk-builds to catch problems with Clang/LLVM in > pkgsrc packages with something close to 5.0.0. The only ones were fixed > in pkgsrc, NetBSD-current and backported to -8. That sounds good, but given that the freeze is coming soon and the clang release hasn't happened, it still scares me. > This clang upgrade will involve llvm, clang, lldb, polly etc. > > We don't version clang and perhaps we shouldn't unless there is a good > reason like a dependency from an important package. Clang is rather > ascending with the number of supported features, backends, frontends > etc; contrary to GNU toolchain that keeps reducing undermaintained code. I didn't mean to say that I thought clang needed versioning (but somebody else wants an older version). I really just meant that changing what is built by the unadorned name shouldn't happen in the period just before a freeze. I have zero objections to just committing the update to 5 when the freeze ends, and then there's plenty of time to fix anything that needs fixing. But I'm not sure the rest of PMC shares this view, and I'm not sure who's running this freeze, so what I think may not matter this time :-)
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature