[lldb-dev] [LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] LLVM 3.7 release plan and call for testers

Pavel Labath labath at google.com
Thu Jun 25 06:34:18 PDT 2015

On 24 June 2015 at 23:56, Ed Maste <emaste at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On 24 June 2015 at 13:46, Hans Wennborg <hans at chromium.org> wrote:
>> The main objective is to make sure everything compiles and works in
>> the released version of the code, so checking out and testing the code
>> once we've branched, filing bugs and trying to get them fixed is
>> basically what the release is all about.
> I'll do this for FreeBSD (unless Dimitry gets to it first).
Ok, I can do this for linux, at least for the rc1 phase. I am going on
vacation at the end of july.
Does llvm+clang have some automated testing infrastructure for
releases, such as buildbots pointing to the release branches?

>> For Clang and the main llvm libraries, we provide pre-built binaries
>> in the release, built with the utils/release/test-release.sh script. I
>> don't know if it would be practical to do this for lldb as well.
> We could, but I don't think there is nearly as much value in doing this for
> lldb as for clang/llvm.

I think having prebuilt binaries of lldb would be a good thing, as it
would make it much easier for people to try it out. I see a couple of
possible problems with this:
- clang uses configure+make to build the release version. We usually
build with cmake and I don't think anybody seriously tests the
configure build of lldb. However I guess it should be possible to make
configure work, or we can provide lldb binaries built with cmake. I
know there are some plans to deprecate the configure build, do you
have any idea what's the progress of that?
- lldb has a smaller set of supported architectures than clang. It
should build (or we can easily make it build) on the different
flavours of linux x86(_64). With some effort, it should build on
arm/aarch64/mips, but except arm, these targets are in a pretty bad
- lldb is much less stable than clang. However, since we are already
releasing it as part of 3.7, i see no reason to not provide binaries
as well.

What do you think?


More information about the lldb-dev mailing list