[20.03] llvmPackages_10: init at 10.0.0 #84094
Conversation
Backport of llvmPackages_10 since Chromium 83 will depend on it. See NixOS#83350 (comment) llvmPackages_10: copy llvmPackages_9 * starting with rc2 * make `lldb` compilable again on Darwin * separate out manpage creation for `lldb` into a new derivation * minor tweaks to the patching of sources, some of which are backportable to earlier versions (cherry picked from commit f111c6f) llvmPackages_10: rc2 -> rc3 http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2020-March/139729.html Additionally cherry-picked 3 commits from `llvm-project/master`: - llvm/llvm-project@d21664c - llvm/llvm-project@3a0f6e6 - llvm/llvm-project@87dac7d such that clang can automatically pick up the polly plugin from the `llvm-polly` build. (cherry picked from commit 3a84353) llvmPackages_10: rc3 -> rc4 Only needed to update hashes and the version. Updated comment for extension handling patch (cherry picked from commit 0ec3f4e) llvmPackages_10: removed extra polly-build There is no good reason to have separate builds for polly and no-polly versions. wwwwwThe reason for the two versions was (as far as I can tell) to defer rebuilds (see ed60483). Polly is now enabled by default. (cherry picked from commit e9aa877) llvmPackges_10: rc4 -> rc5 updated versino and hashes for new rc (cherry picked from commit cdee144) llvmPackages_10: rc5 -> release updated hashes and url updated comment regarding version/release_version to make it clearer (cherry picked from commit 4665b2a)
DieGoldeneEnte
changed the title
|
@GrahamcOfBorg build llvm_10 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The diff LGTM and the contents of pkgs/development/compilers/llvm/10 are indeed the same as on master.
As this only adds new attributes there is additionally no chance of any breakage so I see no problem with merging this PR right away.
@primeos Do we want to wait until Chromium 83 is released?
No need, it would actually best to merge this PR ASAP so that I can backport and test the required Chromium patches (including patches for some dependencies).
Edit: One thing I noticed is that you've already squashed all commits. AFAIK the normal approach would be to cherry-pick them individually, but since all original commit references are there I don't see any problems with this approach (it's probably cleaner anyway and I don't think we have any hard requirements regarding this - apart from the original commit references).
|
@NixOS/backports any objections? If not I'd assume that this is good to go (if the tests pass). |
|
@DieGoldeneEnte thank you :) |
|
@primeos New packages are usually fine (especially if they're new versions of existing packages). As long as default versions don't change, that has much larger implications. |
Motivation for this change
Backport of llvmPackages_10 since Chromium 83 will depend on it.
See #83350 (comment)
@primeos Do we want to wait until Chromium 83 is released?
Things done
sandboxinnix.confon non-NixOS linux)nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review wip"./result/bin/)nix path-info -Sbefore and after)