Re: Freeze for LLVM packages
2010/8/16, Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>:
> On Sun, 2010-08-15 at 22:21 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote:
>> 2010/8/15, Adam D. Barratt <adam@adam-barratt.org.uk>:
>> > On Thu, 2010-08-12 at 19:01 +0200, Arthur Loiret wrote:
>> >> - Rename the current "llvm" source package to "llvm-2.6" and
>> >> replace binaries by versioned binaries. Thus, it is allowed to have
>> >> two versions in the archive (the 2.7 version is already versioned),
>> >> just like GCC.
>> >
>> > My primary question is "what does this gain us for Squeeze?" I can see
>> > that it could make future maintenance easier when llvm 2.8 hits the
>> > archive, but that's not going to the case for Squeeze.
>>
>> Starting with 2.7, the new convention is to have versioned source
>> packages, to allow several different versions to co-exist.
>
> Apologies if my question wasn't clear. I appreciate why having the
> versioned names is advantageous - I'm just not sure what the advantage
> is to doing the renaming for 2.6 in squeeze, rather than in squeeze+1.
>
> So far as I can see, the current packages are already co-installable,
> albeit under the names "llvm" and "llvm-2.7"; that's not as clean as
> might be preferable, but it would work.
The current binaries packages from "llvm" should be provided by
"llvm-defaults", which would Depends on the versioned 2.7 binary
packages from "llvm-2.7". The current binaries packages from "llvm"
have to be renamed to some versioned binaries packages then.
In other words, here is what I want for squeeze:
* llvm-2.6 provides libllvm-ocaml-2.6-dev, llvm-2.6, llvm-2.6-dev,
llvm-2.6-doc, llvm-2.6-examples, llvm-2.6-runtime, llvm-2.6-source.
The binaries package have to be renamed, and some files inside them
have to be versioned.
* llvm-defaults provides llvm, llvm-runtime, llvm-dev,
libllvm-ocaml-dev. They would all Depends on the corresponding
versioned packages and just provide symlinks. So, when an user
installs "llvm", it will also install llvm-2.7 and symlink, for
example, /usr/bin/llc to /usr/bin/llc-2.7.
* llvm-2.7 provides libllvm-ocaml-2.7-dev, libllvm2.7, llvm-2.7,
llvm-2.7-dev, llvm-2.7-doc, llvm-2.7-examples, llvm-2.7-priv-dev,
llvm-2.7-runtime, llvm-2.7-source. Already the case.
Very most users want to use 2.7 rather that 2.6. It would just make
their life easier by just asking them to install "llvm-dev" and use
unversioned binaries.
As I already said, those changes are smooth for the archive.
>> >> - Upload a package called llvm-defaults which would provide the
>> >> binaries for the default (2.7) version. It can be found in its current
>> >> state here [0]. Also like GCC.
>> >
>> > The llvm-defaults package begins producing the llvm binary package, but
>> > build-depends on "llvm (>= 2.7)". As the latest version of llvm in the
>> > archive is 2.6-9 and the version built from llvm-defaults would be 0.1,
>> > that would make the package unbuildable.
>>
>> This should be "llvm-2.7 (>= 2.7-1)", indeed. Thanks, fixed.
>
> On a related note, the version of at least the llvm binary package would
> also need to be greater than the current 2.6-9. apt won't view llvm_0.1
> as requiring an upgrade from an already installed package of a higher
> version.
The llvm-defaults 0.1 source package builds 2.7-1 binaries, see
debian/rules. This package still needs a bit of work, but not on this
side.
Thanks,
Arthur.
Reply to: