[cfe-dev] [LLVMdev] is configure+make dead yet?
chandlerc at google.com
Thu Jun 21 11:40:37 PDT 2012
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Douglas Gregor <dgregor at apple.com> wrote:
> On Jun 20, 2012, at 5:13 PM, Nick Lewycky <nlewycky at google.com> wrote:
> Is there anybody who is certain that our autoconf dependency needs to stay
> around? Are there developers stuck on systems that don't have a recent
> enough cmake in their most recent release, or maybe are using some features
> from configure+make that the cmake build system doesn't implement?
> If nobody pipes up, I might actually try actually removing it!
> I think this is premature, although I consider it a worthy goal. Right
> now, the only motivation we have for removing "configure+make" is that we
> don't like having two build systems, but that's not good enough.
Here here. Thanks for writing up this detailed and accurate response.
> Some things that CMake needs to do well for it to become the only way to
> build LLVM/Clang:
> - Optionally build and install compiler-rt
> - Optionally build and install libc++
FYI, I'm currently in-flight working on the first of these, and planning to
work on the second afterward.
> - Ease-to-use cross-compilation support
> - Documentation to make it easy to understand how to do the above
> - LLDB?
> - LLVM testsuite support
I think David might be interested in this. However, the way LNT is
structured, I don't think this is a requisite: it is now much more common
to build the testsuite independently of llvm/clang, and hand it a set of
And some value-add that might make CMake motivating for others:
> - Easy bootstrap
> - Build packages/installers
A couple more:
- Support for ninja if you happen to have it (and no cost if you don't)
gives you faster rebuilds.
- Slightly better support for the new Tooling infrastructure.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the cfe-dev