On Sat, 29 Dec 2012 12:26:44 +0100 Kamil Rytarowski <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 29.12.2012 12:19, Christiaan Welvaart wrote: > > On Sat, 29 Dec 2012, Balcaen John wrote: > > > >> Le lundi 24 décembre 2012 12:49:23 mitya a écrit : > >> [...] > >>> mitya <mitya> 3.2-1.mga3: > >>> + Revision: 334668 > >>> - Fix build > >>> - Cleanup, split apidocs to separate package > >>> > >>> + kamil <kamil> > >>> - get rid of %clean > >>> - remove P1, merged upstream > >>> - update Version and Release tago to 3.2 and 1 > >>> - new version 3.2 > >> Can you also rebuild packages depending of llvm ? > > > > AFAICT neither mesa 9.0 nor 9.1 (snapshots) build with llvm 3.2. > > Instead, the "r600" llvm branch needs to be used for mesa 9.1, > > which is not in sync with the 3.2 release. > > > > > > Christiaan > There is also a problem with opengtl, upstream supports only LLVM 3.0 > and 3.1 (nothing new in their Version Control). > But there were promises to fix these packages (there was a code > reorganization in LLVM 3.2, changed file names etc.). > > If moving software to llvm 3.2 isn't simply possible, then could we > fork our llvm package and produce llvm31 and llvm (= 3.2)? > This is a bit off topic, but if it's possible and we decide to provide llvm31, then please do the importing right/properly and do a 'svn cp' from correct llvm revision in SVN to keep revision history etc etc.
