Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

New release? #243

Closed
ernfrid opened this issue Sep 4, 2016 · 7 comments
Closed

New release? #243

ernfrid opened this issue Sep 4, 2016 · 7 comments

Comments

@ernfrid
Copy link

ernfrid commented Sep 4, 2016

Hi,

We're currently trying to button down a pipeline and were wondering if you might consider releasing a new version so that there is a stable version containing biod/BioD#21 that we could utilize.

Thanks for your consideration!

@lomereiter
Copy link
Contributor

lomereiter commented Sep 5, 2016

Hi,

I can add a git tag, but I'm reluctant to produce a new binary release.

Here's the situation in full:

  • so far I've been building packages for CentOS 6 so that they work for everyone
  • however, CentOS 6 doesn't play well with latest LLVM releases (3.5+), or maybe the other way around
  • binaries built inside the CentOS 6 docker container appear to segfault a lot more often than what's built with latest LLVM versions (needs to be checked by more people)
  • the above leads to suspect some bugs in LLVM 3.4, see also LLVM 3.4-only (?) shared library CI failure in runnable/aliasthis ldc-developers/ldc#1038
  • besides, LDC developers agreed to drop support for LLVM 3.4 more than one year ago, so that newer LDC releases are untested against it (starting from 0.17 as far as I can tell)
  • just in case, GDC is not an option since it has less development resources than LDC and so even more bugs, and DMD is not an option because its optimization facilities are plain terrible

CentOS 6 is not dead yet, it's going to be kicking until end of 2020. New LLVM versions need glibc 2.14 at least, and I had a ticket regarding non-working LDC build just a couple of months ago (#231).

@pjotrp any thoughts? Could guix be used to help in fighting this insanity? (So that static binaries are built, don't ever hope to convince everyone install guix itself.)

See also Linuxbrew/homebrew-science#257 where bottles were built for CentOS 7 with quite a bit of jumping through hoops (kudos to everyone involved, I'm very impressed by this effort).

@ernfrid
Copy link
Author

ernfrid commented Sep 6, 2016

Well that all sounds horrible. 😢

I believe we were able to get a local compilation (on Ubuntu 10.04) with some hoop jumping as well so a git tag would certainly be enough for my (admittedly selfish) needs.

@pjotrp
Copy link
Member

pjotrp commented Sep 6, 2016

GNU Guix would solve the deployment issues with ldc/LLVM in a distribution agnostic way and would be a sane way forward from a development perspective. I am willing to work on that a bit later this year. It would be a good way forward because we will also add Conda support from Guix and (hopefully) get non-root installs.

@ernfrid
Copy link
Author

ernfrid commented Sep 9, 2016

I just wanted to follow up and ask about this again. Do you think you will be releasing a new git tag soon? Thanks again!

@lomereiter
Copy link
Contributor

Good news: I've managed to find a CentOS 6 Docker image with LLVM 3.8 and compiled LDC 0.17.1 on it (which should allow to compile latest LDC but I didn't go into that). So the new release is finally out there.

@ernfrid
Copy link
Author

ernfrid commented Sep 10, 2016

Hurray! Thank you so much!

@sambrightman
Copy link
Collaborator

Great news. Is there any reason to stick with LDC 0.17.1 instead of 1.0.0? Maybe due to bootstrapping? Maybe pre-built 0.17.1 be used to build 1.0.0/1.1.0.

Relatedly, I think debugging (either locals or unmangling or both) is broken in several combinations, but LDC 1.1 should fix for LLVM 3.8+. I had it working on LLVM 3.7.1 + LDC 1.0.0.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants