[LLVMdev] [cfe-dev] [3.6 Release] RC3 has been tagged

[Jack Howarth]

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:10 PM, Jack Howarth
<howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote:
>> On 18 February 2015 at 19:52, Jack Howarth
>> <howarth.mailing.lists at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Assuming that the clang-omp
>>> developers can find time to rebase their upstream tree on the new 3.6
>>> release, I intend to do the same for the fink llvm36 packaging. So
>>> yes, a stable compiler does matter to some folks.
>>
>> So it seems that you're one of the very few people that doesn't use
>> ToT. Almost everyone else uses it and the progress of LLVM kind of
>> assume you do.
>>
>
> I believe MacPorts uses the major llvm releases for their toolchain
> these days as the older supported systems don't have access to the
> latest Xcode (due to SDK deprecation).
>
>> The past releases didn't mean much until we started doing the
>> dot-releases, and even those didn't mean much in the first iterations.
>> You can't blame people for not caring that much for something that so
>> few people actually use it.
>
> Well, I assumed that llvm releases were supposed to be more than just
> glorified semi-annual snapshots.
>

Also doesn't FreeBSD use the standard major llvm releases for their
system compilers? Somehow, I doubt that they would be thrilled to have
to resort to svn trunk.

>>
>> I think that buildbots make us rely a lot more on inter-release master
>> branches than we should. Maybe once more OS distributions start
>> relying on LLVM we'll have to match a more professional release cycle,
>> but for now, we have very little reason to.
>>
>> I'm perfectly happy to open a bug for each one of that Phoronix run's
>> regressions and fix throughout the next six months...
>>
>> cheers,
>> --renato