[cfe-dev] Hello from a newcomer! + Bug 26834

[kinan.sarmini@gmail.com via cfe-dev]

It does find the toolchain in the directory given by the sysroot flag, and
lists it as a candidate GCC Installation. The problem is it also checks for
the existence of crtbegin.o in the corresponding lib directory (and
considers the installation invalid when crtbegin.o is not present), which
clearly isn't required when only doing syntax checking. As I see it, one
way to fix this is to make the GCC installation detector aware of the
compilation mode (or final phase), but I'm not sure whether this kind of
dependency is good. Any ideas?

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 6:10 PM, Jonathan Roelofs <jonathan at codesourcery.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 3/7/17 6:32 AM, Vassil Vassilev via cfe-dev wrote:
>
>> On 02/03/17 12:58, kinan.sarmini at gmail.com via cfe-dev wrote:
>>
>>> Hello everyone,
>>>
>>> a quick intro: I'm planning to participate in Google Summer of Code
>>> this year as a student, and I'm really interested in the llvm project
>>> in general and clang in particular. To increase my chances of getting
>>> accepted and to get a better understanding of the project and its code
>>> base, I'm currently working on fixing some open bugs.
>>>
>>> I started working on bug #26834 (as suggested by Vassil Vassilev), and
>>> i have a couple of questions. I hope this is the right place to ask.
>>> I'm still new to the project, so please bear with me as my questions
>>> might be silly.
>>> So regarding bug #26834: I've figured that the reason the right
>>> headers aren't being added is because every candidate gcc installation
>>> is scanned for Multilibs, and if they aren't detected, then the gcc
>>> installation is ignored. Now I'm not sure which one is the right
>>> behavior, i.e. is the check for Multilibs necessary
>>> ( https://github.com/llvm-mirror/clang/blob/master/lib/Driver/
>>> ToolChains.cpp#L2798
>>> )?
>>>
>> Maybe you can ping the person who worked in that area (git blame should
>> tell you).
>>
>> If you know how to fix the issue, fix it, run the test suite and if all
>> is green submit a patch for review at: http://reviews.llvm.org/ adding
>> as reviewers the people worked in that area.
>>
>
> Feel free to add me as a reviewer.
>
> I suspect the bug is that clang calls the target triple:
> "x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu" and gcc calls it: "x86_64-linux-gnu", and thus
> doesn't find the toolchain there.
>
> Maybe for ".*-none-.*-.*" and ".*-unknown-.*-.*" triples we ought to
> search the corresponding ".*-.*-.*" directories?
>
> The output from '-v' ought to tell you about which candidate gcc
> installations/multilibs it found, if everything is working correctly.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jon Roelofs
>
>
>
>> -- Vassil
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Regards,
>>> Kinan.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cfe-dev mailing list
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>
>>
> --
> Jon Roelofs
> jonathan at codesourcery.com
> CodeSourcery / Mentor Embedded
>



-- 
Regards,
Kinan.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20170308/8c924e01/attachment.html>