John T. Criswell
criswell at uiuc.edu
Sun Dec 12 21:55:01 PST 2004
Chris Lattner wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Dec 2004, Jeff Cohen wrote:
>>> I definitely prefer #1. The only concern I have with it is that
>>> this makes it impossible to move the llvmgcc install directory once
>>> it is built (tools would not look in the correct directories).
>> This is a very big concern. Users of LLVM generally do not build
>> llvmgcc -- are actively discouraged from building it -- and therefore
>> would have no option as to where it must be installed on their system.
> That is an excellent point, one which I had not fully considered.
> One way to deal with this (properly even), would be to have the 'gcc'
> compiler driver pass in a -L option that indicates the location of the
> bytecode-libs directory. It already passes in -L options for
> "lib/gcc/<target>/3.4-llvm/" and others, so this should be pretty easy.
I agree that this is the right way to go; it's been on my mind for some
time, but I've never explored the possibility.
I think LLVM_LIB_SEARCH_PATH should still exist, sort of as a parallell
to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, but the compiler driver should be able to pass the
-L option to gccld/llvm-ld/whatever to include the compiler runtime
Speaking of which, is there a reason not to install the libraries inside
of LLVMGCCDIR/lib? That's where libstdc++ lives, and it's already in
the llvm-gcc's search path?
-- John T.
More information about the llvm-dev