[cfe-dev] Dynamic linked (.so) files for clang?

Dave Johansen davejohansen at gmail.com
Fri Dec 5 15:39:35 PST 2014


Your concerns definitely make sense from a developer perspective, but
probably not as much from a user/admin perspective, and since I'm a
user/admin of LLVM/clang and not familiar with its internals I don't have a
good answer to your concerns.

But here's an explanation of where my desire for it to be a dynamic library
is coming from.
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries
I have to say that I agree with all of the points in the Fedora guidlines
as to why libraries shouldn't be linked statically (but as I said before
I'm an LLVM/clang user/admin and not a developer). Also, Fedora/RHEL have a
system called Software Collections (
https://fedorahosted.org/SoftwareCollections/ ) for managing multiple
versions of a library/application on the same machine, and they potentially
help address your concerns but not without a little work.

Hopefully, that helps shed some light on my perspective.

Thanks,
Dave

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:35 AM, Laszlo Nagy <rizsotto.mailinglist at gmail.com>
wrote:

> hi Dave,
>
> for curiosity, if libclang*, libllvm* (the currently static artifacts)
> will be dynamic library, how would you solve these problems:
>
> - install different versions of clang on the same machine? (developers do
> that)
> - install a tool which is linked against an older version of libclang*?
> (tool developers might be/are in delay)
>
> i know it is possible to do all of these with dynamic libraries. but i
> fear that it is less effort to use static libraries for clang developers
> and for tool developers. (playing with LD_LIBRARY_PATH or rpath is less
> preferred over static libraries.) so maybe a compiler is good exception
> from this packaging guideline rule. maybe creating a child package for
> compiler developers (containing the static libraries and the corresponding
> header files) could make it already more ecstatic. what do you think?
>
> regards,
> Laszlo
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 4:31 AM, Dave Johansen <davejohansen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 12:15 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I would personally like to create a big DSO for all of clang, but I
>>> don't think anyone is working on this.
>>>
>>
>> How big of a project would this be? Basically, could someone like me that
>> has no real experience working with LLVM/clang (other than building and
>> using it) do this?
>> Thanks,
>> Dave
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20141205/40868244/attachment.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list