[Lldb-commits] [lldb] r176522 - Add instructions for building LLDB with CMake

[Malea, Daniel]

Hi Dmitri,

Building/testing lldb with cmake+ninja+ccache should be fixed in 176596.
Let me know if you have any other problems!

BTW, I'm noticing a failure (error, actually) in a recently added test
TestCPP11EnumTypes. The reason for the failure seems trivial (missing
-std=c++11 flag I believe) but worryingly, the buildbots are not picking
up the error. I think I know why -- the clang lit test parser we're using
isn't looking for the string "ERROR:". Unless someone beats me to it, I'll
look into subclassing the observer class so the buildbot picks up those
errors as well.


Cheers,
Dan

On 2013-03-06 5:05 PM, "Malea, Daniel" <daniel.malea at intel.com> wrote:

>Cool! That sounds like a good idea. In my testing, cmake+ninja is about
>10% faster (<1min on my machine) than configure+make for a full build, and
>probably much faster for partial buildsŠ
>
>I'll let you know when ccache support is done.
>
>
>Dan
>
>On 2013-03-06 5:02 PM, "Dmitri Gribenko" <gribozavr at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Malea, Daniel <daniel.malea at intel.com>
>>wrote:
>>> Ah, I haven't tried using ccache -- I'll give that a shot and see what
>>>can
>>> be fixed.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the info! Are you planning to switch the buildbot over to
>>>ninja?
>>
>>Yes, I was just trying it out to see if it is faster.  But I aim for a
>>completely combined buildbot: llvm + compiler-rt +
>>clang+clang-tools-extra + lldb + lld.
>>
>>Dmitri
>>
>>-- 
>>main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if
>>(j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <gribozavr at gmail.com>*/
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>lldb-commits mailing list
>lldb-commits at cs.uiuc.edu
>http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits