[lld] Makefiles for lld.

[Sean Silva]

On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Iain Sandoe <iain at codesourcery.com> wrote:

>
> On 30 May 2014, at 21:52, Eric Christopher wrote:
>
> > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Sean Silva <chisophugis at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 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")
> >
> > This is what I'd have expected here.
>
> the design is modelled exactly one what's done for clang et. al. (i.e. I
> followed the design used for these other modules)
>
> so, the statement is "you should not notice anything different from what
> you've already seen".
>
> If something is not clear, of course, I would do my best to elaborate.
>

Cool. Sounds good.

-- Sean Silva


> Iain
>
> >
> > -eric
> >
> >>
> >> -- 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/20140530/43a39b9d/attachment.html>