https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=239682
--- Comment #38 from Brooks Davis <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Jan Beich from comment #36) > "typical pkg set" argument is double-edged, sacrificing many for the few. If > LLVM_DEFAULT is too old (e.g., misses some C++20 stuff or has bugs only fixed > in later version) it may lead to individual ports hardcoding llvm versions. > However, some like Mesa can avoid RUN_DEPENDS by statically linking. I'd like to see us bump LLVM_DEFAULT well before the next release comes out (roughly every six months), I just think it's best to give it some settle time. One could argue for waiting for the X.0.1 patch release, but that's probably more conservative than necessary. FWIW, I do get a fair bit of dogfooding even in the RCs without soliciting testing. It might be worth doing a call for testing on the mailing list for LLVM_DEFAULT bumps in the future. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-gecko To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
