[llvm-dev] Clang is a resource hog, the installers for Windows miss quite some files, and are defect!

[David Greene via llvm-dev]

Stefan Kanthak via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:

> "Michael Kruse" <llvmdev at meinersbur.de> wrote:
>
>> I think David is not referring to the capitalization of file names, but to
>> "DUPLICATE", "WASTING", "NOT AMUSED", "BOGUS" etc.
>
> I EMPHASIZE in the only way possible with plain text.

There are *many* ways to _emphasize_ text without shouting.
                                          ~~~~~~~
>> It should be possible to report problems in a professional manner.
>
> It should also be possible to handle problem reports in a professional
> manner!

>From everything I have read, both Michael and David were very
professional in their responses.  You're just not going to get a lot of
sympathy when you approach things in an adversarial manner.  It turns
people off.

>> Please remember that the project is made available by volunteers
>> for free. We also have a dedicated bug tracker: bugs.llvm.org.
>
> You are free to enter the bugs I pointed out there.

That's not the way it works in a project where people freely volunteer
their time.  If someone else feels this is a serious problem, they may
very well file a proper bug.  But if not, this report isn't going
anywhere unless you file a bug and even then there's no guarantee people
will have the time to work on it.

> I don't use LLVM, so don't expect me to jump throught loops to report
> obvious bugs.

I guess I don't understand your concern then.  If you don't use LLVM,
why are you installing it and why do you care about its size?

>> On UNIX systems, these are symlinks.
>
> UNIX and Windows are quite different.

True.

>> There are multiple potential equivalents to symlinks on Windows systems,
>> the one matching UNIX systems the closest is relatively new and requires
>> either Administrator rights or developer mode turned on.
>
> Hardlinks don't. And they are available on both systems.

They aren't available on FAT32 filesystems though.

>> Typically tools ported from a UNIX environment to Windows just copy the
>> file instead symlinking to avoid dealing with issues such as when the
>> installing on a non-NTFS file system (FAT, network drive, etc),
>
> Do you really want to tell that the installer LLVM uses on Windows was
> ported from UNIX?  REALITY CHECK, please!  The default installation
> goes into %ProgramFiles%\LLVM, which is located on NTFS.

I am not familiar with the Windows installer.  There's no installer as
such for Unix-like systems.

There probably is some way to detect the filesystem type of the install
directory and create links.  It's a matter of someone feeling it's
important enough to do.  Shouting about it won't make it happen faster.

>> Since mass storage is cheap, there isn't a lot of motivation to save to
>> invest time to save some space. However, you are free to invest that time
>> yourself and submit patches.
>
> I'm even free not to use LLVM at all, but nevertheless see and report its
> bugs and deficiencies here: be professional and fix them

Professionals don't make demands of others.  You've been pointed to the
correct process for reporting bugs.  If you aren't able or willing to do
that there's not a lot the community is going to do for you, especially
if you keep disparaging its members.

                -David