Re: handling libLLVM after 2017Q4 is cut

[Tobias Nygren <tnn%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Hi,

A few notes:

> Before updating libLLVM, we'll need to have tested at least MesaLib,
> rust, and openjdk7/openjdk8.  This may lead to delayed updates, but I
> think that's ok.

Mesa and Rust, yes. The OpenJDK LLVM option never worked correctly
and can be disregarded until made functioning. (It is only relevant
for ARM ports.)

> It looks like libLLVM34 installs to a different prefix, so that
> libLLVM34 and libLLVM can be installed at the same time.  If that's
> really true, then multiple versions of libLLVM are feasible.

That is correct.

> It is not clear if there are any reasons to keep libLLVM34.  There are
> two packages in wip that use it.  It's not clear if users want to use it
> other than to build other pkgsrc packages.

It was only added to keep -wip packages working. There used to be ~5
packages. Probably those two wip packages can be updated to support
newer LLVM versions.

Kind regards,
-Tobias