https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=263798

Mikhail Teterin <m...@freebsd.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Assignee|ge...@freebsd.org           |r...@freebsd.org
             Status|Closed                      |Open
         Resolution|FIXED                       |---
                 CC|                            |m...@freebsd.org
            Summary|www/firefox: Channel error  |lang/rust - gecko ports
                   |on startup in version 100   |with LTO enabled are
                   |                            |dysfunctional

--- Comment #18 from Mikhail Teterin <m...@freebsd.org> ---
(In reply to Oleg Sidorkin from comment #15)
> Rust switched to LLVM14 in 1.60, so linker from llvm13 that links firefox 
> binary doesn't know how to work with llvm14 libs.

Thanks for the investigation, Oleg. This seems like something someone ought to
report to LLVM project -- the 13.x linker either ought to do "the right thing",
or die with a noisy error :(

Meanwhile, in my humble opinion, lang/rust ought to use the ports-provided llvm
-- the ongoing flip-flopping between that and using the bundled version needs
to stop.

If llvm14 is really mandatory for the newer Rust versions, then lang/llvm14 
ought to become a dependency. But the ci.yml files inside Rust's sources
indicate llvm-12 as the minimum requirement, so users ought to be able to use
those already installed older versions too.

This would reduce build-times significantly and eliminate the mixing of
toolchains, which is a bad idea in general and, according to Oleg's
investigation, is the actual source of problem in this case in particular.

(In reply to Christoph Moench-Tegeder from comment #9)
> fixed in firefox-100.0_3,2 firefox-esr-91.9.0_2,1 thunderbird-91.9.0_3 - see 
> commit ports fc0a979a30ea

Disabling an otherwise valid option is not a fix, it is a work-around :( I
understand, that gecko-maintainers cannot do much more than that -- except to,
maybe, set BROKEN for those, who have LTO explicitly turned on in the options
already (so we don't waste hours recompiling the heavy ports)...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.

Reply via email to