[llvm-commits] patch to llvm-link to link in archives

Kalle Raiskila kalle.raiskila at nokia.com
Fri Aug 10 02:33:56 PDT 2012


Hello Stephen,

Linking bitcode archives is certainly a useful feature that should be 
re-introduced to llvm.

30.07.2012 22:04, ext Stephen Checkoway skrev:
>
> While implementing the library search functionality, I ended up duplicating and
> rearranging the code in Linker::FindLib() because that offered no way to prefer
> dynamic libraries/require static libraries.

Why not edit Linker::FindLib() directly instead of duplicating it?


> I did not include checking for
> libfoo (no extension) as is done starting on line 143 of lib/Linker/Linker.cpp
> because I didn't understand what that particular code is trying to do and I
> couldn't square the comment with the code. Namely, I don't see how checking if
> /some/path/libfoo exists lets you link to a specific .so version like
> libfoo.so.1.0.0.

I read it the same way. i.e. the FullPath.eraseSuffix() on line 145 
shouldn't be there. I'm sending this mail to Ivan Krasin who committed 
that part, if he might explain it to us. :)


kalle


-- 
But beware the debugger. Dark side of the source it is.
If once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate
your destiny. Consume you it will.



More information about the llvm-commits mailing list