RELENG_10 to RELENG11 buildworld no possible ?

[Warner Losh]

On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 12:12 AM Dimitry Andric <dim at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On 9 Jul 2019, at 08:08, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 11:58 PM Dimitry Andric <dim at freebsd.org> wrote:
> > On 8 Jul 2019, at 17:38, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 7:21 AM Mike Tancsa <mike at sentex.net> wrote:
> > >> On 7/8/2019 3:09 AM, Patrick M. Hausen wrote:
> > >>> Hi all,
> > >>>
> > >>>> Am 08.07.2019 um 08:30 schrieb Thomas Mueller <mueller6722 at twc.com
> >:
> > >>>> Or maybe via 11.2R, if that can be built from RELENG_10?
> > >>> I just completed a successful build of RELENG_11_2 on a
> > >>> RELENG_10_4 system …
> > >>>
> > >>> Kind regards,
> > >>> Patrick
> > >>
> > >> I am guessing all is good up until
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-stable-11/2019-April/009220.html
> > >>
> > >> If I svn update -r346291(commit before the import of the new clang)
> all
> > >> builds fine.
> > >>
> > >> Not sure if its worth a note in UPDATING, or mentioning it here in the
> > >> google archives will be good enough for anyone else who runs into it.
> > >>
> > >
> > > I think it is worth a note. I'll add one.
> > >
> > > We should also followup with dim@ to see why static_assert from
> RELENG_10
> > > is incompatible with the new compiler, and why it's used in a way that
> > > would break.
> >
> > I took a quick look, but I don't think there is any quick solution.  For
> > some reason, clang 3.4.1 (which shipped with 10.4) cannot handle the
> > static_asserts which are inside the piece of code in question.  Also,
> > there are several other compilation errors, due to it being unable or
> > unwilling to cast pointers.
> >
> > Upstream LLVM has recently bumped the requirements for building quite
> > aggressively, it could very well be that a higher version of clang or
> > gcc is now required to build 8.0, precisely because of the above.  At
> > some point they apparently wanted to drop the workarounds for old
> > compilers.
> >
> > Could you look into what the new requirement is? If there's no simple
> workaround, I'd like to at least document what the minimum is better than I
> have.
>
> Okay,
> http://releases.llvm.org/8.0.0/docs/ReleaseNotes.html#minimum-required-compiler-version
> says:
>
> Clang           3.5
> Apple Clang     6.0
> GCC             5.1
> Visual Studio   2017
>

OK, so the clang in releng10 is 3.4.1. I'll update the note then.

Warner