[LLVMdev] Is there room for another build system?

[Álvaro Castro Castilla]

Hi!

I've used Cmake since one year, and even with LLVM. I haven't compiled
it with cmake of course, but projects using it. I think it is easy to
maintain and I felt very comfortable with it.
It can do every thing I've ever needed and when something rare is
missing you can eval an isolated bash script...



2008/7/30 Samuel Crow <samuraileumas at yahoo.com>:
> Hi Kenneth,
>
> If the LLVM project is switching to CMake, then CTest might be the framework of choice to use rather than scripting up something in Bash.
>
> --Sam
>
>
> --- On Wed, 7/30/08, Kenneth Boyd <zaimoni at zaimoni.com> wrote:
>
>> From: Kenneth Boyd <zaimoni at zaimoni.com>
>> Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Is there room for another build system?
>> To: "LLVM Developers Mailing List" <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
>> Date: Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 3:15 PM
>> Jonathan Brumley wrote:
>> >
>> > 2 more roadblocks for Visual Studio users are the
>> inability to compile
>> > gcc and the inability to compile and run the test
>> suite.  I would not
>> > want to submit a change unless I could still
>> compile/run gcc and pass
>> > the test suite.  (Testing before submission is the way
>> we do it where
>> > I come from - I am assuming it's the same here).
>> >
>> > On a related note, has anyone gotten the LLVM test
>> suite working on
>> > MinGW?   I am in the process of trying to get LLVM
>> working on my
>> > Windows box.  I expect I can get the test suite
>> working on Cygwin -
>> > but I'm not sure about MinGW.
>> The LLVM test suite requires expect as a dependency of
>> DejaGNU.  The
>> stock source of expect requires a *NIX fork, so it's
>> relatively
>> difficult to build under MinGW even though Tk/Tcl is easy
>> to build under
>> MinGW.  (I'm not aware of a precompiled MinGW binary
>> for expect,
>> although it might be in one of the more obscure packages).
>> I'd be
>> interested in a successful build (with patches) for expect
>> myself.
>>
>> I've been thinking of constructing a mirror test suite
>> coordinated using
>> shell scripts (bash) to replace DejaGNU.  (This is for
>> maximal
>> portability.  For Windows, batch files are another option;
>> however, they
>> have some limitations relative to shell scripts.)
>>
>> This is rather solidly in the "feasibility
>> study/vaporware" stage for
>> LLVM, although I've had moderate success testing the
>> ideas with batch
>> files on an internal project.
>>
>> Kenneth
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
>> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
>



-- 
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
> http://www.alvarocastro.es