LLVM/Clang 3.9 Is Shipping Soon With OpenCL 2.0, ThinLTO & Much More

[Mystro256]

you don't need release for that

Well some people would rather not replace their LLVM version with one that differs from their distro, such as for inconvenience or security concerns.

[pal666]

Well some people would rather not replace their LLVM version with one that differs from their distro, such as for inconvenience or security concerns.

well, llvm release does not magically jump into their distro, so release is still irrelevant

[Azpegath]

you don't need release for that

Well, yes I do, since the Gentoo devs haven't included the early releases (or -9999/git) in the tree. The official release means that it'll be in within a couple of weeks (hopefully faster).

[pal666]

i'm not familiar with gentoo, but at least you can build it yourself or change distro

[Azpegath]

i'm not familiar with gentoo, but at least you can build it yourself or change distro

I'm aware, but thank you for the information. Gentoo is a rolling release, so we continually get the latest release from most software (sometimes there is a longer wait though, because of stabilization issues, for instance a big GCC release), and we are also able to "unmask" unstable versions (even installing git builds from the package manager).
The reason I want the official release is that I want a stable, well-tested and proper release, that I can trust to be all of those things.

[pal666]

I want a stable, well-tested and proper release, that I can trust to be all of those things.

that would be 12.x, not 12.0

[pal666]

btw, it is written in mesa release notes

[Azpegath]

that would be 12.x, not 12.0

True, but now we were talking about LLVM, not Mesa. And regarding both Mesa and LLVM, even an "unstable" release is way more tested that a HEAD-build from Git.

[pal666]

LLVM, not Mesa

my bad