Re: llvm-toolchain-8 backport to buster, or wait for 10?

[Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre@debian.org>]

Hello

Le 16/10/2019 à 06:18, Nicholas D Steeves a écrit :
> Hi Gianfranco!
>
> Gianfranco Costamagna <locutusofborg@debian.org> writes:
>
> >   ack!
> >
> >      Il domenica 25 agosto 2019, 16:03:44 CEST, Nicholas D Steeves <nsteeves@gmail.com> ha scritto:
> >   
> >   Dear Sylvestre and Backports Team,
> >
> > A user of irony-mode (libclang-powered Emacs minor-mode) is struggling
> > to use newer version of libclang on buster (tldr; he's attempting to
> > use 10, and I wrote I'd be happy to backport 8, because we have to
> > wait until 10 is released and migrates to testing before official
> > Debian support on buster is possible):
> >
> >    https://github.com/Sarcasm/irony-mode/issues/543
> >
> > If llvm-toolchain-10 is just around the corner and will be one of the
> > versions released with bullseye then it makes sense to wait until its
> > released.
> >
> > Otherwise, would someone else like to maintain a buster bpo of
> > llvm-toolchain-8?
> Thanks again for backporting llvm-toolchain-8!
>
> Llvm-toolchain-9 is now in testing.  Would you please backport that one
> too?  I switched irony-mode_1.4.0-1 to use it, and this package is also
> now in testing.  IIRC the latest stable version of llvm-toolchain is
> also used for libmesa, so it will also be useful for an eventual libmesa
> buster-backport.

I don't think all llvm toolchain versions should be backported.

They are complex packages and are time consuming to maintain.

Your users should use https://apt.llvm.org/

Cheers

Sylvestre