[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] release/18.x: [cmake] Add minor version to library SONAME (#79376) (PR #82409)
RalfJung wrote: Making such a fundamental change to the .so file so late in the release was probably a bad idea... a bunch of downstream projects will have to adjust the way they link with LLVM and that's [not always easy](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121889). https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82409 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] release/18.x: [cmake] Add minor version to library SONAME (#79376) (PR #82409)
RalfJung wrote: Yeah, I linked to it: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121889. I'm not a linker expert, but it seems that now symlinks are required to link against the LLVM .so file, but we can't ship symlinks in our artifacts because of Windows. The old approach we used of just shipping the .so file and pointing the linker at it doesn't seem to work any more with the new sonames. I don't claim to understand why, I am involved solely because my tool no longer builds after rustc updated to LLVM 18 rc4. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82409 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
[llvm-branch-commits] [llvm] release/18.x: [cmake] Add minor version to library SONAME (#79376) (PR #82409)
RalfJung wrote: > So the problem Rust sees isn't that a ".1" was added to the version, but > rather that the name was changed from "libLLVM-18-rust-1.78.0-nightly.so" to > "libLLVM.so.18.1-rust-1.78.0-nightly". (that is: all the version info > previously went into the library name which comes before ".so", and now goes > into the library version which comes after ".so"). Ah, I didn't catch the shifted `.so` -- sounds right. > Are you configuring LLVM with -DLLVM_VERSION_SUFFIX=-rust-1.78.0-nightly ? I have no idea, as I said I am working on a tool that fails to link now but have no direct contact with our LLVM stuff otherwise.^^ @nikic would know more. At this point we seem to be on-track for fixing this so a revert would probably be extra work for us. But other users that tested rc3 may still be surprised by this I guess. https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/82409 ___ llvm-branch-commits mailing list llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
