[Lldb-commits] [PATCH] D24749: [CMake] Initial support for LLDB.framework

Zachary Turner via lldb-commits lldb-commits at lists.llvm.org
Mon Sep 19 19:39:47 PDT 2016

Unless someone has a strong desire to keep it and it adds necessary
functionality I would vote for removing it. It can always be maintained
downstream. That being said, let's wait and see if anyone chimes in.

I also want to test this tomorrow to make sure nothing breaks.

Just to be clear, if i were to apply this on mac into a canonical
llvm-style directory hierarchy and run ninja check-lldb, is that supposed
to work?
On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 6:36 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:

> tfiala accepted this revision.
> tfiala added a subscriber: labath.
> tfiala added a comment.
> This revision is now accepted and ready to land.
> Chris - you might want to add @labath to this as well.
> ================
> Comment at: source/API/CMakeLists.txt:9
> @@ -8,1 +8,3 @@
> +option(LLDB_BUILD_FRAMEWORK "Build the Darwin LLDB.framework" Off)
> +
> ----------------
> zturner wrote:
> > Is there any reason to have this off when building on OSX?  Is there any
> value in having it not be an option at all, but just if you're on Darwin,
> you just always get a Framework?
> I mentioned to Chris that I wasn't sure if the Google folks (or maybe
> Dawn) that build with the CMake build might want to keep it building the
> old way.
> I'd be all for only building only the framework way with CMake if nobody
> else particularly cared.  That would simplify things.  But I don't want to
> force it if anybody else cares.
> Our goal is to get the CMake-based build producing the same exact thing as
> our Xcode-based build.
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D24749
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-commits/attachments/20160920/de819573/attachment.html>

More information about the lldb-commits mailing list