[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Fwd: Raising CMake minimum version to 3.4.3
Chris Bieneman via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue May 3 10:33:25 PDT 2016
A few things.
First I don’t think anyone is suggesting we should update *ever* “just because”. In fact, I think as a community we’ve held a pretty high bar for updating the CMake dependency favoring keeping it stable. Notice my failed attempt to move to CMake 3.1 last year.
Second, I’d really like to keep discussions of future updates to the version separate from the current update. I know I started this all in my email by stating “...we may find ourselves re-visiting this conversation in a year or two…”, but let’s please not entangle to two.
I want to stress that what I was suggesting originally was that we may find compelling reasons to update our CMake version in the future. The CMake developers are actively adding new and useful features and we *might* find that new features are valuable enough to raise our minimum version again in another year or two. Alternatively we might find that we’re happy on 3.4.3 for the next decade.
Despite my problems keeping track of dates, my love of DeLoreans, and my affinity toward driving at 88 MPH, I am not a time traveler. I have no idea what the future holds. I just don’t think we should hold back our project by being unwilling to revisit this conversation. It is still a conversation. Nobody is suggesting we should commit to a regular update schedule for kicks.
> On May 3, 2016, at 8:26 AM, John Reagan via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I'm happy to share what our strategy for porting OpenVMS to x86 using LLVM, but I don't want to distract from the original question. I was just stating that bumping the minimum CMake version yearly just because you can easily get newer kits from cmake.org isn't true for me. I have no problem saying that 3.4.3 is the minimum version. Or even 3.5.2. I don't care.
> I will only be using CMake when we have working OpenVMS x86 systems. The fact that I'm starting on IA-64 hosts is not relevant.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C Bergström [mailto:cbergstrom at pathscale.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2016 11:12 AM
> To: James Y Knight
> Cc: John Reagan; llvm-dev; llvm-dev-request at lists.llvm.org
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Fwd: Raising CMake minimum version to 3.4.3
> I'm not sure if they are doing an x86 to IA64 cross compile, but in any event I'm going to guess they may need an ancient version to avoid any C++11 dependencies. In terms of IA64 compilers you have afaik 3 choices HP compiler, Open64 and Intel? (Does gcc still support it and how up-to-date or EOL is the Intel compiler IA64 support?)
> I really hope nobody decides not to move to a more recent version of cmake because of IA-64.
> On Tue, May 3, 2016 at 9:55 PM, James Y Knight via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> It sounds like your problem is with having cmake working at all, not
>> which version is required...So I'm not sure how requiring an upgrade
>> every year could make that any worse.
>> If anything, I'd expect you to need a newer version in order to get
>> porting changes.
>> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 1:48 PM, John Reagan via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>> As one of the OS' without current CMake support, I'm closely watching
>>> this discussion. We currently have LLVM 3.4.2 hosted on OpenVMS
>>> Itanium (as a host only, x86 target) using configure/make with little
>>> hassle. We plan to port CMake to OpenVMS, but that has been trickier
>>> than you'd think (others have tried, I haven't found anybody who has
>>> done it). Looks like I'll want to visit the cmake-developers list to as we get farther along.
>>> The "lets update every year just because" does have ripple effects
>>> for us non-traditional platforms.
>>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
More information about the llvm-dev