[lld] Makefiles for lld.

[Sean Silva]

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Yeah I figured Iain would be doing the actual maintenance here.
>

Unless this is going to be a "developers ignore the Makefiles and Iain
cleans up any breaks" situation (which I don't think is very desirable),
developers will still need to make some modifications to the Makefiles. I
don't mind this too much, but could Iain please explicitly give
instructions for how the Makefiles need to be changed when the following
relatively common development operations need to be done:

- Adding a new file to one of the libraries
- Adding a new unittest
- Adding a new library (this also includes splitting one library into two)
- Modifying the dependencies between libraries.

(well, unless the answer is "exactly the same as for the core llvm tree")

-- Sean Silva


> On May 29, 2014 12:45 PM, "Michael Spencer" <bigcheesegs at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> lgtm as long as I don't have to maintain it. There is going to be some
>> restructuring of the build soonish to fix the circular dependency
>> problem, if you can update these when that happens then this is fine.
>>
>> - Michael Spencer
>>
>>
>> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 11:34 AM, Eric Christopher <echristo at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Seems reasonable to me.
>> >
>> > Michael?
>> >
>> > -eric
>> >
>> > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 8:08 AM, Iain Sandoe <iain at codesourcery.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> Hi Eric,
>> >>
>> >> sorry this took so long, (other things just kept creeping up the TODO).
>> >>
>> >> This is a set of Makefiles based on the approach(es) used elsewhere in
>> the tree.
>> >> I've been using these for quite a while on both OSX and Linux with
>> either clang or GCC as the bootstrap compiler.
>> >>
>> >> With this patch, lld will build (with autoconf & make) when it is
>> found in llvm/tools (using the same approach as lldb).
>> >>
>> >> Right now, as with lldb, there's no more finesse than that (i.e.
>> there's no way to switch lld on/off other than directory presence/absence
>> in tools/).
>> >>
>> >> The lld tests are added to check-all.
>> >>
>> >> does this seem like a reasonable starting point?
>> >> cheers
>> >> Iain
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> llvm-commits mailing list
> llvm-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvm-commits
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20140530/ccb617e9/attachment.html>