Like C++? Not afraid of quirky build systems? Seeking LLVM co-maintainers

Jon Masters jcm at
Wed May 9 22:00:05 UTC 2012

On 05/09/2012 05:57 PM, Jon Masters wrote:

> More broadly though, I feel that GCC is well represented in terms of
> engineering knowledge but I'm *concerned* that we run the risk of
> growing a dependence on LLVM that is more critical than the LLVMpipe
> stuff. Before we can blink, we might need LLVM for building lots of
> other fundamental stuff. I am wondering if as a distribution we ought to
> have an official FESCo-debated position on LLVM use? I do not think
> Fedora has the resources to maintain two critical toolchain pieces. I do
> think LLVM is useful, etc. BUT its growing use is concerning.

Putting that another way, if we carried eglibc in Fedora, there would be
cries and shouts if a large number of packages started requiring it
because we have folks that maintain GLIBC. I feel LLVM is a similar
piece of critical technology that we should not need for critpath.


More information about the devel mailing list