[cfe-dev] Why no Debian package for libc++?

[Ben Pope]

On 29/07/13 15:48, Arji Cot wrote:
> Well FreeBSD is not Linux

My point was that they have a toolchain that is free of libstdc++ and
libsupc++.

> also llvm is a project mainly focused on Mac
> OS, and MAC OS is part of the BSD world, no surprise that if something
> is supported under MAC OS, it's probably portable under any other BSD OS.
> 
> The main reason why I'm not sharing your view is simple: if this is true
> I can't explain why the llvm project keeps considering libc++ and
> libc++abi as "experimental" under linux. I mean if you can even build
> the kernel and libc++ really is libstdc++-free and libsupc++-free what
> else do you need to mark it as a reliable library ?

I think somebody to actually do it and test it would probably be a bare
minimum.  Not all code that compiles is bug free.

Linux thrives on GPL, the desire to push Clang and LLVM is therefore
much lower than FreeBSD where they have been sat on an ageing toolchain
due to licensing issues.

What I'm saying is that I can currently build software on Linux with
Clang and libc++ and libc++abi, and it appears to work.  I'm not
pretending that it is entirely GPLv2 free, or that some of my
dependencies don't also rely on GPLv2 code from GCC, but the bits that I
have written and the C++ code that I depend on and compile myself are
using libc++ and libc++abi.

Ben