On 26/11/2012 12:42, Arthur Loiret wrote:
> Hello Sylvestre,
>
> Installing clang and llvm-runtime packages on my Debian testing, here is
> what I get :
>
> $ cat hello.c
> #include <stdio.h>
> int main (void) {
> printf ("Hello, world!\n");
> return 0;
> }
> $ clang -emit-llvm -c hello.c && lli hello.o
> lli: hello.o: unknown type in type table
>
> However, installing llvm-3.1-runtime as well, 3.1 being the LLVM version
> clang is based on, I get (forcing the lli version to 3.1) :
>
> $ clang -emit-llvm -c hello.c && lli-3.1 hello.o
> Hello, world!
I am not sure to see how it is related to the bug 693208 ?
> I think asking our users to explicitly use versioned LLVM tools with clang
> is wrong. In the future, I think you should base clang on the default LLVM
> version, even if a newer LLVM version is available in the repositories.
I don't understand what you mean:
In wheezy, llvm-default install llvm 3.0:
http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/llvm
and the version of clang in wheezy is 3.0:
http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/clang
> Regarding the current clang packages in the repositories (3.0 in testing,
> 3.1 in unstable), you would have to add an epoch to downgrade clang to 3.0
> in unstable with a fix and then have to fix migrated to testing. This would
> also fix the issue above, but epochs are, well, not beautiful...
>
> What is your opinion regarding those issues?
I don't know. It is why I asked to the release team for guidance.
Sylvestre
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
