From nobody Thu Feb 08 19:17:55 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-toolchain@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TW6Fd4wtkz5BDpW; Thu, 8 Feb 2024 19:17:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Received: from spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (spindle.one-eyed-alien.net [199.48.129.229]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TW6Fc73Bvz4mPR; Thu, 8 Feb 2024 19:17:56 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=freebsd.org (policy=none); spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net has no SPF policy when checking 199.48.129.229) smtp.mailfrom=brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net Received: by spindle.one-eyed-alien.net (Postfix, from userid 3001) id E837B3C019A; Thu, 8 Feb 2024 19:17:55 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2024 19:17:55 +0000 From: Brooks Davis To: Mark Millard Cc: FreeBSD Toolchain , FreeBSD Mailing List Subject: Re: For devel/llvm18 context: Bad llvm18 *.so file names? Bad references to llvm18 *.so file names? libLLVM-18.so vs. libLLVM-18rc.so ? Message-ID: References: <78C3797B-BCA5-4FFA-A14E-8A3135DAD95A.ref@yahoo.com> <78C3797B-BCA5-4FFA-A14E-8A3135DAD95A@yahoo.com> <71F86B94-6D27-4CE4-8FD5-321538DAB6EF@yahoo.com> <4FCDBDD8-183F-47D6-A35D-6B4AC042B7B7@yahoo.com> <62F9061D-1033-4CB8-8B5F-FA88A9160FED@yahoo.com> List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD s integrated toolchain List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-toolchain List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <62F9061D-1033-4CB8-8B5F-FA88A9160FED@yahoo.com> X-Spamd-Bar: - X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.42 / 15.00]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.82)[-0.822]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[brooks@freebsd.org,brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[freebsd.org : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none]; FREEFALL_USER(0.00)[brooks]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:36236, ipnet:199.48.128.0/22, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-ports@freebsd.org,freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[brooks@freebsd.org,brooks@spindle.one-eyed-alien.net]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[yahoo.com]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; TO_DN_ALL(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TW6Fc73Bvz4mPR On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 05:24:17PM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: > On Feb 6, 2024, at 16:44, Brooks Davis wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 04:22:51PM -0800, Mark Millard wrote: > >> On Feb 6, 2024, at 15:11, Mark Millard wrote: > >> > >>> On Feb 6, 2024, at 15:02, Mark Millard wrote: > >>> > >>>> Using BE_STANDRD, I built llvm18 as part of a poudriere > >>>> bulk run, which resulted in: > >>>> > >>>> # ls -Tlod /usr/local/llvm18/lib/libLLVM*.so > >>>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel uarch 15 Feb 6 13:34:30 2024 /usr/local/llvm18/lib/libLLVM-18.1.0rc.so -> libLLVM-18rc.so > >>>> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel uarch 138305928 Feb 6 13:30:11 2024 /usr/local/llvm18/lib/libLLVM-18rc.so > >>>> lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel uarch 15 Feb 6 13:34:30 2024 /usr/local/llvm18/lib/libLLVM.so -> libLLVM-18rc.so > >>> Sorry for the confusing additional notation: > >>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> that showed in in the E-mail. I had not noticed at the time that > >>> the mail program was helping me in that way: it was not deliberate > >>> on my part. > >>> > >>>> But later in the pooudriere bulk run when mesa-dri tried to build > >>>> it complained about not finding libLLVM-18.so : > >>>> > >>>> [amd64_ZFS] Extracting llvm-18_1,1: .......... done > >>>> ===> mesa-dri-23.3.5 depends on shared library: libLLVM-18.so - not found > >> > >> The following suggest more names that might be problematical > >> in devel/llvm18 as thigns are --and includes the *rc.so one: > >> > >> # grep "\" /usr/ports/devel/llvm18/pkg-plist > >> bin/llvm-rc%%LLVM_SUFFIX%% > >> llvm%%LLVM_SUFFIX%%/bin/llvm-rc > >> llvm%%LLVM_SUFFIX%%/lib/libLLVM-%%LLVM_RELEASE%%rc.so > >> %%CLANG%%llvm%%LLVM_SUFFIX%%/lib/libclang.so.%%LLVM_RELEASE%%rc > >> %%LLDB%%llvm%%LLVM_SUFFIX%%/lib/liblldb.so.%%LLVM_RELEASE%%rc > > > > This comes from upstream and will change with the release: > > > > https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/22683463740e55e7e0d7e664395c30899b229205 > > > > I wonder if mesa is inappropriately hard coding the library name or if > > there's a cmake file issue that should be resolved upstream (those > > generally seem to reference static libs though). > > > > $ llvm-config18 --libs > > -lLLVM-18rc > > > > Looking at /usr/ports/Mk/Uses/llvm.mk it does not > seem to deal with the "rc" naming unless > _LLVM_MK_VALID_VERSIONS has the rc listed. Picking > the .so notation handling as an example . . . > > _LLVM_MK_VALID_VERSIONS= 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 > > will not produce _LLVM_MK_LIBLLVM with an rc via > its notation: libLLVM-${_LLVM_MK_VERSION}.so llvm.mk has a history of wrong assumptions I've not had time or energy to address. It should ideally be made to work with LLVM_VERSION=-devel which lead to resolutions for most of these issues. For the rc phase of llvm18 I've now added an libLLVM-18.so symlink. -- Brooks