search

conda-forge / llvmdev-feedstock

A conda-smithy repository for llvmdev.
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
8 stars 41 forks source link

llvmdev v18.1.1 #254

Closed regro-cf-autotick-bot closed 6 months ago

regro-cf-autotick-bot commented 7 months ago

It is very likely that the current package version for this feedstock is out of date.

Checklist before merging this PR:

Information about this PR:

  1. Feel free to push to the bot's branch to update this PR if needed.
  2. The bot will almost always only open one PR per version.
  3. The bot will stop issuing PRs if more than 3 version bump PRs generated by the bot are open. If you don't want to package a particular version please close the PR.
  4. If you want these PRs to be merged automatically, make an issue with code>@conda-forge-admin,</codeplease add bot automerge in the title and merge the resulting PR. This command will add our bot automerge feature to your feedstock.
  5. If this PR was opened in error or needs to be updated please add the bot-rerun label to this PR. The bot will close this PR and schedule another one. If you do not have permissions to add this label, you can use the phrase code>@<space/conda-forge-admin, please rerun bot in a PR comment to have the conda-forge-admin add it for you.

Closes #257

Pending Dependency Version Updates

Here is a list of all the pending dependency version updates for this repo. Please double check all dependencies before merging.

Name Upstream Version Current Version
llvmdev 18.1.0 Anaconda-Server Badge

Dependency Analysis

We couldn't run dependency analysis due to an internal error in the bot, depfinder, or grayskull. :/ Help is very welcome!

This PR was created by the regro-cf-autotick-bot. The regro-cf-autotick-bot is a service to automatically track the dependency graph, migrate packages, and propose package version updates for conda-forge. Feel free to drop us a line if there are any issues! This PR was generated by https://github.com/regro/cf-scripts/actions/runs/8171666852, please use this URL for debugging.

conda-forge-webservices[bot] commented 7 months ago

Hi! This is the friendly automated conda-forge-linting service.

I just wanted to let you know that I linted all conda-recipes in your PR (recipe) and found it was in an excellent condition.

h-vetinari commented 7 months ago

@conda-forge/llvmdev this is green now; 18.1.0 had a bug that got fixed in 18.1.1. PTAL :)

h-vetinari commented 6 months ago

@isuruf Any objection to removing $PREFIX/lib/libLLVM-{{ major_ver }}${SHLIB_EXT} in the context of https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/91a384621e5b762d9c173ffd247cfeadd5f436a2?

isuruf commented 6 months ago

I don't understand? Why are we removing a symlink that the project is adding?

h-vetinari commented 6 months ago

The referenced commit explains:

The main library now has a more convential library name: libLLVM.so.$major.$minor. The old library name: libLLVM-$major.so is now a symlink that points to the new library.

So for one, libLLVM-$major.so is considered "the old library name" - which in itself wouldn't be an issue for shipping it - but secondly, libLLVM-$major.so is now a symlink that points to libLLVM.so, which breaks our output-layering (as the latter is not part of libllvm18, and so the symlink appears dead and test -f ... fails).

Seeing that there's now a "new" library name, I didn't think it's necessary to fix this, but if you want to retain the old name, we can point libLLVM-$major.so to libLLVM.so.$major.$minor.

h-vetinari commented 6 months ago

It's perhaps worth mentioning that I've built a functional LLVM stack for rc4 without that symlink, which is also why I don't think that we really need it.

h-vetinari commented 6 months ago

Ah, just saw that this was fixed in https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/10c48a772742b7afe665a815b7eba2047f17dc4b in the meantime. It's also on the 18.x branch already (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/4cc7a75aa6ac272a5774ef7ca3f6b2ad095425e3), but while the github UI doesn't show it as released in a tag, it's actually part of 18.1.1.

xhochy commented 6 months ago

If I understand the comments here correctly that the discussion you hab is resolved by upstream in the latest release and we could merge if CI passes?

h-vetinari commented 6 months ago

That's the plan yes :)