Quoting Sylvestre Ledru (2020-11-28 20:08:51) > > Le 28/11/2020 à 19:57, Jonas Smedegaard a écrit : > > Package: llvm-11 > > Version: 1:11.0.0-5+b1 > > Severity: normal > > Seems to me that - - the least invasive solution is to have > > LLVM 11 > > > is your sentence finished ? :)
Whoops, simply editorial noise I forgot to delete - please ignore :-) > > Assuming my understanding of the above is correct, the least > > invasive solution seems to be to have llvm-11 cherry-pick the LLVM > > patch to handle this "emscripten EH functions" renaming: > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/3bba91f64eef15956f589fa446c265a714cc7893 > > I am not super excited to take a patch that big, esp for bullseye. > > Instead, what about getting upstream to take this patch into 11.0.1 ? > (which will be ready in time for bullseye). I doubt upstream would find it appropriate to change the binary interface towards other tools (specifically, binaryen) for a minor revision of their project: LLVM upstream most likely works perfectly fine as-is, when used with some older release of binaryen than what is currently targeted Debian bullseye. As I see it, this is a Debian-specific issue: binaryen and LLVM-11 are incompatible, and one of the following is needed to fix it: a) downgrade binaryen b) patch LLVM c) document the incompatibility To me, option b) seems the least painful - but yes, it is then pain inflicted on your instead of the binaryen maintainer or our users :-/ If you think that you can convince upstream LLVM developers to address this in a minor update, then great. My experience trying to convince emscripten developers to think in stable releases has not been great, however, so I am pessimistic there :-( Thanks for considering, regardless of the outcome, - Jonas -- * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt * Tlf.: +45 40843136 Website: http://dr.jones.dk/ [x] quote me freely [ ] ask before reusing [ ] keep private
signature.asc
Description: signature
