On July 10, 2019 at 7:07 PM, Ken Moffat via blfs-support
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 11, 2019 at 12:39:52AM +0000, Hans Malissa via blfs-support wrote:
Thanks a lot. Unfortunately I didn't log the tests, which would have been
really helpful. I will build it again, and log both the build and the tests. I
will also try llvm-8.0 and do the same.
I'm not sure if I understand the connection between LLVM and rustc; I have
already built and installed rustc on my system (followingÂ
http://linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/view/stable-systemd/general/rust.html);
neither rustc nor LLVM list each other as a dependency.
Greetings,
Hans
As a general rule, if you are taking the time to run tests then you
really need to log them. A few packages end up with 'All passed' if
everythign is ok, but even there details of problems can be much
earlier if there are any failures. More generally, packages spit
the test results out in batches, e.g. run tests in one directory,
report, then repeat in another directory.
When I updated rustc to 1.32.0 we were using LLVM-7 and that version
of rust was horribly flakey - for some people - with system LLVM.
Also noted on Arch, eventually it became clear that it needed a
newer LLVM (and 8.0.0 had not been released, so we used the version
of LLVM which was included within the rust source).
Now that firefox-68 needs a newer rust we've had to again update.
But the system LLVM-8.0.0 seems to be good enough so we can revert
to using system llvm when building rust (to save time and space,
assuming people have already installed LLVM).
I say "seems to be good enough" because I've only used the system
version on a couple of machines where I have LLVM-8, the other
machines with older systems are using LLVM-7 so I've again built
rust with its shipped LLVM on those.
And if I didn't need to build LLVM for the AMD part on my
radeon|amdgpu machines, and with clang etc to use to build rust, I
would do my best to avoid LLVM ;-)
Specifically, clang's reported strengths differ from gcc's and it
still lacks the ability to compile the linux kernel (on x86) and its
strengthening features are considered to lag behind gcc, as well as
its options being different (hit one the day before yesterday in
testing, it didn't like a -malign-data option I was trying, fixed
by telling that package to use gcc and g++).
OTOH, mozilla go out of their way to favour clang, so in a future
version of firefox we might again need to use it.
Thanks for the explanation! My video controller is Intel i910, does that mean I
would be able to build mesa without LLVM? It's listed as a dependency. If I
understand you correctly, without the amdgpu & radeon part, I wouldn't even
need LLVM, is that right?
Greetings,
Hans
--
http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
