[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: clang/llvm 6.0.0
* On 2018-01-16 at 23:09 GMT, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> On 16.01.2018 21:22, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > I've recently been working on packages for clang, llvm, compiler-rt,
> > libcxx, and libcxxabi version 6.0.0 (pre-release). These are prefixed
> > under $PREFIX/llvm6 and default to using compiler-rt and libcxx (i.e.
> > no GCC required).
> Does it mean that we will delete libLLVM? Namespacing the whole
> Clang/LLVM toolchain makes sense as each utility can be used as a library.
Possibly, I forgot to add to the TODO list that I'd like to
investigate doing the llvm build in a way so that we don't need a
separate libLLVM, but instead have llvm-lib and llvm-bin or something
which avoids having to build things twice.
> > The branch is here:
> > https://github.com/NetBSD/pkgsrc/compare/trunk...joyent:joyent/dev/clang
> > and is now able to over 13,500 packages on SmartOS and increasing:
> > http://us-east.manta.joyent.com/pkgsrc/public/reports/trunk/x86_64/20180115.2101/meta/report.html
> > I'd be interested in feedback on implementing things this way and if
> > anyone else is interested.
> > Still to do:
> > * Proper runtime dependency handling for libcxx/libcxxabi.
> > * Something like USE_PKGSRC_CLANG. I'm currently using a
> > bootstrapped prefix to then build the report above but that means
> > dependencies on the bootstrap prefix which is no no no.
> > * Update to 6.0.0 when released.
> There is merged support for sanitizers (ASan, UBSan) from the Oracle
> toolchain team. One patch to go for tests. I'm going to commit it soonas
> it has been just accepted.
> Part of the Solaris work is post branch 6.0.0.
Yeh I tried to get them to build but there were issues, so for now
they are disabled, but I definitely want to revisit them.
> Could you please add a package for llvm-lit? wip/py-llvm-lit*. This
> package is required for the execution of Clang/LLVM tests using the lit
> Could you please submit your SunOS patches to reviews.llvm.org and add
> as a reviwer <ro>. He has been working on the Oracle Solaris patches.
No, these are mostly pkgsrc specific patches and aren't suitable for
> Are you planning to add a support for building against sanitizers the
> pkgsrc packages?
Hopefully, again that was something I missed from TODO.
> It's worth to include in the llvm6 namespace in one go LLDB and LLD;
> even if temporarily without proper SunOS support.
Yes, though I will probably leave that to someone else as they aren't
very useful for SunOS.
Jonathan Perkin - Joyent, Inc. - www.joyent.com
Main Index |
Thread Index |