[llvm-dev] [cfe-dev] Fwd: Raising CMake minimum version to 3.4.3

[John Reagan via llvm-dev]

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.
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>