[lldb-dev] Use of MAKE in tests

[jingham at apple.com]

That won't work on the Mac for Xcode builds, which is what pretty much all of us here use to build lldb.

Jim

> On Jul 18, 2014, at 6:03 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> 
> I don't think it's that simple, because some of the test have to exercise features of the debugger that deal with how your program was built.  Was it built with symbols, without symbols, with FPO, are the symbols in a different folder than the exe (e.g. testing the symbol search path), etc.  
> 
> I thought about it a little, because I agree with you that it's annoying to have the test run CMake and then depend on some external build tool, but I think an elegant way to make this work is to just have all of the test executables and libraries built at the same time you build LLDB.  The nice thing about this is that the tests end up running significantly faster, because simply running the test suite will never end up building anything, it will just load executables that have already been built.  It also avoids the additional dependency problem, because you're already building LLDB with CMake to begin with.
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
> I haven't stared deeply at LLDB's usage of make, but I think adding CMake to the mix is a step in the wrong direction.  CMake isn't a make replacement, it's a meta-build system and autoconf replacement.  Once you generate build files, you'll still have an external dependency on some other build system (ninja or msbuild).
> 
> Aren't most LLDB test programs simple enough to be linked with something like the lit shell interpreter?
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 3:55 PM, <jingham at apple.com> wrote:
> This is mostly historical.  So long as I don't have to do it, I don't really mind one way or the other.  OTOH, beware, this sort of thing is sticky...
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> > On Jul 18, 2014, at 3:47 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
> >
> > I'm not very well versed in MAKE, but an issue I'm encountering currently is the use of MAKE in compiling the test files.  Is there any reason CMake can't be used here?  There's a lot of shell-specific logic in the Makefile currently that is hard to reproduce on Windows, so if we can port everything to CMake it might be helpful.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> > _______________________________________________
> > lldb-dev mailing list
> > lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lldb-dev mailing list
> lldb-dev at cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
> 
>