[LLVMdev] LLVM 3.4 stable releases

Renato Golin renato.golin at linaro.org
Mon Jan 20 08:06:04 PST 2014

On 20 January 2014 15:44, Tom Stellard <tom at stellard.net> wrote:

> Thanks for the feedback.  Here is a summary of the responses.
> These items are still up for discussion, but if there are no
> objections in the next few days, I will add these to the
> release documentation:

Hi Tom,

Thanks for the summary, I agree with mostly everything, but I have some
specific comments inline...

+ Shared library name will remain libLLVM-Major.Minor.so, but
  a libLLVM-Major.Minor.Patch.so symlink will be added.

You mean a library M.m.p will be created and a symlink M.m will point to
it, right?

+ Supported platforms will be determined by test coverage.

I'm in two minds about it. While it makes no sense to re-build for all
archs if the bug-fix is specific to only one, it'll confuse people if you
need to use the same toolchain across different architectures, and we'll
end up replying on the list: "oh, 3.5.1 is only for ARM and x86, while
3.5.2 is only for Mips...", etc. I think we should release all binaries,
and maybe test less extensively on the architectures that have no
bug-fixes, but still build the binaries, the libraries, and symlinks.

The problem arises when no one will build and test for arch A and we simply
cannot release something without even knowing it runs. We shouldn't stop
the release because of that, and that would be an acceptable case where
there simply is no patch-release for that arch. I would expect it not to
happen for the architectures listed as "supported" in the documentation,
and in time, it should be "frowned upon" for "supported" architectures NOT
to do a patch release.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20140120/6f912306/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list