[cfe-dev] libc++abi on linux

[Ashok Nalkund]

On 7/9/2012 9:16 AM, Chris Lattner wrote:
>
> On Jul 8, 2012, at 8:00 PM, Ben Pope wrote:
>
>> On Monday, July 09, 2012 08:49 AM, "C. Bergström" wrote:
>>> libcxxrt + libunwind is the way to go imho
>>> https://github.com/pathscale/libcxxrt
>>> https://github.com/pathscale/libunwind
>>>
>>> These have been tested to work with clang - Admittedly the build process
>>> may not be straight forward, but if enough interest maybe we solve that
>>
>> It would be nice to have a documented/tested/working way of compiling
>> *and linking* programs using libc++/clang/llvm on linux, it seems that
>> libc++abi is pretty close to getting that working.
>>
>> This comes up on the list every couple of months and libcxxrt/libunwind
>> are usually suggested over libc++abi.
>
> Actually, the only people that suggest that are the pathscale folks.
>
>> What is the problem?  Is there some disagreement about the scope of
>> libc++abi?  Is there some specific part that has been excluded that is
>> required on linux but not darwin?  Does libc++abi replace libsupcxx (not
>> entirely)?  Does libunwind address just the missing bit or is there
>> overlap? If there is overlap is linking order enough to fix that? is
>> libc++abi equivalent to libcxxrt? And there are lots of other questions
>> that come up and it just makes it hard to get going.
>
> The intention is that libc++abi + libc++ is a replacement libstdc++ in its entirety.  It is factored the way it is because Apple ships the "STL part" of libstdc++ on top of libc++abi: the ABI library is the common linkage between the two STL implementations.  It is a pretty direct replacement for libsupc++, but may not be a 100% analogue (I don't recall).
>
So could you suggest a replacement for unwind? libc++abi + libc++ still 
requires unwind.h, and my temporary solution is to pull it from gcc.

thanks,
ashok