[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: Should lang/clang use lang/libLLVM?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 30.12.2015 14:46, Benny Siegert wrote:
> I noticed that there is a large amount of files that are duplicated
> between the clang and libLLVM packages, albeit with slightly
> different paths (e.g. include vs. include/libLLVM).
> Is there a reason for this duplication? I would love to see clang
> depend on libLLVM, so that you can have both and not rebuild the
> world twice.
I'm developing LLDB for NetBSD and I keep llvm, clang (cfe) and lldb
separated. The three packages are in wip as wip/llvm, wip/clang and
wip/lldb. Today all the LLVM elements are either modular or close for
modularity (see wip/lldb/patches).
Last time I checked it was applicable for libcxx and compiler-rt as well
Building the stack of llvm+clang+lldb in one go with debug symbols and
all backends consumes for me at least 64GB RAM+storage space and a lot
of time (since I don't have so much RAM). For this reason I
modularized the LLDB dependencies in wip.
The LLVM project decided to make the next release the last one to ship
with autoconf and gmake build system. We will need to refactor the
Makefiles for it when it will happen.
I would opt for modularization of lang/clang into lang(devel)/llvm,
lang/clang, devel/lldb etc. Otherwise I will need to add a special
rule for lang/clang and build it without debug symbols and stick to
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Main Index |
Thread Index |