Skip to content

llvm : added version 3.8.0#591

Merged
tgamblin merged 4 commits intospack:developfrom
epfl-scitas:package/llvm
Mar 22, 2016
Merged

llvm : added version 3.8.0#591
tgamblin merged 4 commits intospack:developfrom
epfl-scitas:package/llvm

Conversation

@alalazo
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@alalazo alalazo commented Mar 21, 2016

@tgamblin I don't really understand why @eschnett update is mentioned here after pulling from upstream. If it is polluting in some way the history, I'll just cherry pick the changes and prepare another PR


# Universal dependency
depends_on('[email protected]:')
depends_on('[email protected]:2.8') # Seems not to support python 3.X.Y
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can be 2.7:2.7. The range isn't half-open.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mathstuf Are you sure this will include anything that matches 2.7.X? I just tried and got:

==> Warning: There is no checksum on file to fetch [email protected] safely.
  Fetch anyway? [y/N]

Another issue is, I think, that somehow the preferred keyword got lost in the versioning. If I try :

spack install python

spack installs 3.5.1, even if in the python package I see :

version('2.7.11', '6b6076ec9e93f05dd63e47eb9c15728b', preferred=True)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, maybe because both sides are the same, it is as if there's no range. Yeah, I also saw 3.5.1 being pulled in, hence #592.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If you just want it to match 2.7.x, depends_on('[email protected]') should work. If it doesn't it's a bug.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And preferred was lost in PR #120. @mplegendre is going to add it back if I don't get to it first.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I had tried @2, but that didn't try to match, but instead it tried to use version 2 exactly.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@mathstuf Same for @2.7

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@2.7 is @2.7.0. You want to allow @2.7.11 as well. I'd write @2.7:2.7.999.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@2.7 should match 2.7, 2.7.x, and anything more specific, and @2 should match 2, 2.x, 2.x.y, etc. Is this not the behavior you're seeing? I'll check the tests.

I have wanted to put an exact match syntax in for a while, where @2.7. would match only 2.7 exactly (no additional specifiers) but I have not done that yet.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When I used @2, it was trying to install exactly version 2.

tgamblin added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 22, 2016
@tgamblin tgamblin merged commit f323f54 into spack:develop Mar 22, 2016
@alalazo alalazo deleted the package/llvm branch March 22, 2016 09:30
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants