On Tuesday, 29 September 2015, Dave Airlie <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 29 September 2015 at 11:31, Tom Stellard <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 03:15:27PM +0100, Emil Velikov wrote: > >> Hi Laurent, > >> > >> On 27 September 2015 at 13:21, Laurent Carlier <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > >> > llvm can be built with cmake in a libray with the name > libLLVM.so.$version > >> > > >> Do you know if this is intentional and consistent (i.e. all the build > >> produce such library/ies) behaviour ? > >> > > > > The name of the library depends on the build system used and not the > > version of LLVM. There was a flag added to llvm-config in 3.8 to > > report which build system was used. > > So you're saying that, regardless of the version, the autoconf llvm build produces libllvm-$version.so as opposed to libllvm.so.$version with cmake ? How is that even supposed to work - it seems horribly broken imho. > This is totally broken upstream, and I suggest we don't facilitate the > cmake > behaviour in mesa until it just does what the autoconf build does. > > libLLVM.so.3.7 is not going to be compatible ABI wise with libLLVM.so.3.8 > but ldconfig versioning will consider it to be. > > the llvm cmake behaviour is just broken and should be fixed upstream. > > I second that. This must be fixed upsteam. The autoconf builds even allows you to install multiple versions in parallel, as needed. Emil
_______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
