Re: [Development] LLVM and Qt

[Morten Sørvig]

> On 30 Jul 2018, at 06:00, Thiago Macieira  wrote:
> 
> On Sunday, 29 July 2018 13:36:43 PDT Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer 
> wrote:
>> It would also be pretty nice to know if there is a policy with respect the
>> llvm supported version. As they do not keep ABI compatibility distros
>> normally are forced to ship from two to three versions. As I understand the
>> idea in Debian testing/unstable is to have the latest two always available,
>> sometimes three of them. That already created some issues for us with Qt
>> Creator, as at some point it required a version which was about to be
>> removed.
> 
> Same policy for third-party libraries: we work with the latest, unless that 
> release happened too late in our own release cycle.
> 
> But where do we get LLVM from on a Mac? Is it from Apple? If so, we may need 
> to keep things working with an old, patched version, in addition to the 
> latest. Or we require an upgrade with Homebrew.

For dev/5.12 we’re going to default to LLVM from homebrew if LLVM_INSTALL_DIR
is not set.

The Xcode toolchain does actually contain a libclang.dylib, but as far as I can
see llvm-config and the clang-c/Index.h header are not included, which means we
can’t use it for qdoc.

Morten
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] LLVM and Qt

[Morten Sørvig]

> On 30 Jul 2018, at 06:00, Thiago Macieira  wrote:
> 
> On Sunday, 29 July 2018 13:36:43 PDT Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer 
> wrote:
>> It would also be pretty nice to know if there is a policy with respect the
>> llvm supported version. As they do not keep ABI compatibility distros
>> normally are forced to ship from two to three versions. As I understand the
>> idea in Debian testing/unstable is to have the latest two always available,
>> sometimes three of them. That already created some issues for us with Qt
>> Creator, as at some point it required a version which was about to be
>> removed.
> 
> Same policy for third-party libraries: we work with the latest, unless that 
> release happened too late in our own release cycle.
> 
> But where do we get LLVM from on a Mac? Is it from Apple? If so, we may need 
> to keep things working with an old, patched version, in addition to the 
> latest. Or we require an upgrade with Homebrew.

For dev/5.12 we’re going to default to LLVM from homebrew if LLVM_INSTALL_DIR
is not set.

The Xcode toolchain does actually contain a libclang.dylib, but as far as I can
see llvm-config and the clang-c/Index.h header are not included, which means we
can’t use it for qdoc.

Morten

___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] LLVM and Qt

[Thiago Macieira]

On Sunday, 29 July 2018 13:36:43 PDT Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer 
wrote:
> It would also be pretty nice to know if there is a policy with respect the
> llvm supported version. As they do not keep ABI compatibility distros
> normally are forced to ship from two to three versions. As I understand the
> idea in Debian testing/unstable is to have the latest two always available,
> sometimes three of them. That already created some issues for us with Qt
> Creator, as at some point it required a version which was about to be
> removed.

Same policy for third-party libraries: we work with the latest, unless that 
release happened too late in our own release cycle.

But where do we get LLVM from on a Mac? Is it from Apple? If so, we may need 
to keep things working with an old, patched version, in addition to the 
latest. Or we require an upgrade with Homebrew.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] LLVM and Qt

[Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer]

El domingo, 29 de julio de 2018 17:40:04 -03 Allan Sandfeld Jensen escribió:
[snip]

Wow, that was fast for a sunday :-) Thanks!

> You only need llvm for qdoc. You can probably remove qdoc on those
> platforms, and generate the platform independent documentation packages on
> hosts where it is supported.

Right, there is a porter working on that now. Maybe some app would break in 
case it embeds the documentation using resources, but that would be strange I 
think.

Non the less the other questions remains, if applicable at all.

-- 
2: Windows con las funciones que realiza se clasifica como:
* Un bug
Damian Nadales
http://mx.grulic.org.ar/lurker/message/20080307.141449.a70fb2fc.es.html

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

Re: [Development] LLVM and Qt

[Allan Sandfeld Jensen]

On Sonntag, 29. Juli 2018 22:36:43 CEST Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer 
wrote:
> Hi! As now qdoc has gained a dependency on llvm we noted that many Debian
> ports will not be able to build it anymore, as llvm has (at least for now)
> no support for them:
> 
>  >
> 
> I would like to know if there is any other place in Qt where it might start
> requiring llvm to point porters (people behind those archs) where they will
> be seeing more issues.
> 
> It would also be pretty nice to know if there is a policy with respect the
> llvm supported version. As they do not keep ABI compatibility distros
> normally are forced to ship from two to three versions. As I understand the
> idea in Debian testing/unstable is to have the latest two always available,
> sometimes three of them. That already created some issues for us with Qt
> Creator, as at some point it required a version which was about to be
> removed.
> 
> Please note that I am not objecting the use of llvm in any way, although it
> would be real cool if they kept ABI... but that's not up to us to fix it I
> guess.
> 
You only need llvm for qdoc. You can probably remove qdoc on those platforms, 
and generate the platform independent documentation packages on hosts where it 
is supported.

`Allan



___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development

[Development] LLVM and Qt

[Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer]

Hi! As now qdoc has gained a dependency on llvm we noted that many Debian 
ports will not be able to build it anymore, as llvm has (at least for now) no 
support for them:



I would like to know if there is any other place in Qt where it might start 
requiring llvm to point porters (people behind those archs) where they will be 
seeing more issues.

It would also be pretty nice to know if there is a policy with respect the 
llvm supported version. As they do not keep ABI compatibility distros normally 
are forced to ship from two to three versions. As I understand the idea in 
Debian testing/unstable is to have the latest two always available, sometimes 
three of them. That already created some issues for us with Qt Creator, as at 
some point it required a version which was about to be removed.

Please note that I am not objecting the use of llvm in any way, although it 
would be real cool if they kept ABI... but that's not up to us to fix it I 
guess.

Thanks, Lisandro.

-- 
She got her good looks from her father. He's a plastic surgeon.
 -- Groucho Marx

Lisandro Damián Nicanor Pérez Meyer
http://perezmeyer.com.ar/
http://perezmeyer.blogspot.com/


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
___
Development mailing list
Development@qt-project.org
http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development