[Openmp-dev] [Release-testers] LLVM 7.1.0 release - Please test the branch

[Tom Stellard via Openmp-dev]

On 02/05/2019 10:41 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 16:13 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
>> On 02/05/2019 11:32 AM, Tom Stellard via Release-testers wrote:
>>> On 02/05/2019 11:26 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 11:23 -0800, Tom Stellard wrote:
>>>>> On 02/05/2019 08:07 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 2019-02-05 at 07:36 -0800, Tom Stellard via Release-testers
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The release_70 branch is ready for the 7.1.0 release.  I have updated the
>>>>>>> version and pushed a fix for https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39427,
>>>>>>> which is the only bug we will be fixing in this release.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Since this is an ABI breaking changing and also we are introducing a
>>>>>>> minor version for the first time, please take some time to test the
>>>>>>> branch and make sure everything works as expected.  I'm going
>>>>>>> to try to do the 7.1.0-rc1 release some time after 8.0.0-rc2, once the
>>>>>>> activity around the release calms down a little.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The SOVERSION is still '7'.  Maybe we should force it to '7.1' here?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It should already be changed.  This is what I get when I build:
>>>>>
>>>>> [tstellar at llvm llvm-build]$ objdump -p lib/libLLVM-7.1.so | grep SONAME
>>>>>   SONAME               libLLVM-7.1.so
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'm talking about SOVERSION of shared libs from BUILD_SHARED_LIBS=ON. 
>>>> The one defined in llvm_add_library() function:
>>>>
>>>>       set_target_properties(${name}
>>>>         PROPERTIES
>>>>         # Since 4.0.0, the ABI version is indicated by the major version
>>>>         SOVERSION ${LLVM_VERSION_MAJOR}${LLVM_VERSION_SUFFIX}
>>>>         VERSION ${LLVM_VERSION_MAJOR}${LLVM_VERSION_SUFFIX})
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, I see.  You are correct, we should change the soname on those.  I can
>>> fix this.
>>>
>>
>> This should be fixed now by r353247, can you re-test?
>>
> 
> Yes, though I don't think returning to '71' is a good idea.  It
> introduces a value that is technically larger than '8', and people
> running ldconfig(1) will get libs relinked to .so.71 all the time. 
> Putting a dot there should be safer.
> 

This is fixed now in r353348.  Can you test again?

-Tom